This story has legs, the stench of which has reached my nostrils here in Hawaii. Conservatives seem to think, at least according to their blogs, that this was an isolated and unfortunate accident that should not have an effect on the “Stand Your Ground Law” in Florida. This has been the most heinous example of racism, obviously supported by the State of Florida since we have yet to see an arrest, that I have seen in recent years. The conservatives say “well here comes Al Sharpton to stir up to pot” I say just don’t stir it, but blow it up! The issue here is the principle of the law and how it applies in practice. This incident has made it clear that it needs to be abolished or substantially rewritten. A key excerpt from the law is below:

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

Is it open season time on young black males? I have said in many articles that I am for the right to bear arms, but you will damn well be held accountable for the unjustified use of a firearm. So this Zimmerman fellow could hide his trigger happy instincts behind this law? How is a 17 year old boy, with ice tea and candy presented any real threat? The reports also mentioned that Mr. Zimmerman was told to back off once he gave the report of the boy’s presence to law enforcement, not to stalk the boy. So why follow the boy unless you wanted a confrontation? The man is physically more massive than the boy and the victim was found unarmed except for the lethal weapon, a can of iced tea. There was no real probable cause for Mr. Zimmerman to harass the boy outside of the fact that he had been aware of a rash of burglaries committed by black men in the area. Well, that is not good enough. The fact that Florida law enforcement seems to be dallying around and not making the arrest in this case is riling the black community and justifiably so. So, according the Florida provision, Mr. Zimmerman did what he did to avoid great bodily harm, is that so? Well, I consider this murder a civil rights violation that should be charged as such at a minimum of second degree.

I am so tired of hearing how Mr. Zimmerman is not a Rambo and that he was raised in an integrated community and thus not a racist. These are the same platitudes I have heard all my life and I am not impressed as they fall on deaf ears. The law as written gives any vigilante type license to shoot anyone they want under THEIR assessment of a lethal threat and, of course for many, young black males fit the category merely based on their mere presence in areas of town where others feel that they do not belong. The fact that conservatives make excuses for the perpetrator and the law that he hides behind will not endear them to the black community.

Funny. this reminds me of another similar provision in Texas, which resulted in an unjustified firearm related homicide…..

There was this one incident in Houston suburb some four years ago. It was the case of this man who called 911 to report a burglary in progress at his neighbor’s home. He knew that the neighbors were away for a time. He, it was reported, was the grandfatherly type and wouldn’t hurt a fly. The men were of Hispanic background. The 911 staff repeatedly advised him to stay in his home and not get involved and that the police would be along to deal with it. The man kept on saying that he could not allow these two men he identified to get away with what ever they were taking. He said that he had a shotgun and was prepared to go and stop them. It turned out that he did confront the two men and shot them both. They were unarmed. The autopsies on both men revealed that they were shot in the back.

Through some twisted application of a Texas law that allows assaults of this nature, this man was not held accountable for this act. Doesn’t the ‘Code of the West’ frown on shooting men in the back? Could the fact that these men were non-white allow this man to do this and not have his conscience seared quite as much? I could consider the law a splendid one, if he acted to protect the lives of his neighbors or his own life. I could understand lethal force if the men had broken into this man’s home. As it was though, this fellow was not in any danger and there was not anyone in either house whose lives were at risk by the activities of these burglars. He deliberately took action to kill when he was told by professionals not to, and he is not held accountable, how?

These laws and provisions enacted by Texas and Florida merit closer examination. Heads are going to roll and I have an ample wicker basket to catch them all! I can only hope that this tragic incident in Florida continues to attract public attention to the very nature of these laws, giving the worse kind of vigilante, blood thirsty scum “A License to Kill”.

Comments

No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

sending

Author

Credence2 3 months agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Yes, your first paragraph is an accurate assessment. As you can see, Jack Burton and I were quite in opposition as to how each of us viewed the matter. You know more than you give yourself credit for. But, this is not the frontier spirit, you give the gun culture far too much credit. With the exception of the legitimate hunters, it just a pack of cowards that hide behind a gun rather than face adversity in a rational way. Unlike my travels to other countries during my lifetime, bigotry is still a great part and parcel of American culture, unfortunately.

Jack exaggerates about this 17 year old adolescent. He was no more troublesome than most boys his age. It turns out that this issue was a matter of poor judgement on the part of the adult who was in fact, behaving like an adolescent. As for the confrontation that led to the fatal encounter, it may have been necessary tor Zimmerman to kill in self defense. But he did aggravate the situation by not taking instruction from law enforcement to stay near his vehicle and wait for them to sort out the situation. This Zimmerman is a classic flunkie, a coward and a bully looking for an opportunity to assert himself.

The boy had a legitimate reason to be in the area and I know that if someone was following me, I would be concerned. If this had been a white lady and a 'menacing' black guy was following her, I am sure Jack would be speaking in pig-Latin regarding the change in tune.

Zimmerman and a lot of these gun toting fellows that need to be armed when just going to the corner supermarket, are encouraged to go and do what they normally would not do now that they are carrying a gun. They are of the weak and vacillating class.

Self defense is a valid concept here, but like the case in point (Texas), I believe that these circumstances need to be interpreted much more narrowly.

You are right again, the gun nuts encourage a vigilante culture here. I live in Florida, so if you are out this way, I will roll out the red carpet. We will make certain that you stay away from Sanford.

Jack Burton 3 months agofrom The Midwest

At the time he was shot by George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin was already a suspected serial burglar, stolen gun trafficker, and multiple drug abuser with a self-documented history of committing violence against other people, and enjoying it. It is nothing more or less than a statement of absolute fact to describe Trayvon Martin as matching the dictionary definition of a “thug” well before he ever encountered George Zimmerman.

George Zimmerman was on his way to the store when he noticed a figure in the rain lurking outside the window of a home in his community which had just recently been burglarized. This is very suspicious activity, and Zimmerman called 911 and followed the suspicious character from a distance while relaying information to the dispatcher.

When that figure noticed Zimmerman following him in his truck at a distance, he sprinted away between buildings, and quickly disappeared in the dark. Zimmerman left his truck in a vain effort to keep the suspicious person in sight for responding officers, but gave up his attempt when the dispatcher told Zimmerman “we don’t need you to do that.” Zimmerman then walked to the next cross street to provide the dispatcher the address of the last known location of the suspicious person, hung up his phone, and began walking back to his truck.

More than four minutes had passed since Trayvon Martin ran away.

Out of the darkness, Trayvon Martin came up behind George Zimmerman, and said “what you followin’ me fo’?”

Martin then sucker punched Zimmerman, knocked him to the ground, mounted him like an MMA fighter, and began raining down blows along with smashing his head back into the concrete sidewalk. Zimmerman repeatedly cried for help from his neighbors, and while several called 911 at some point in the fight, only one man stepped out briefly to yell at Martin to stop attacking Zimmerman, but he offered no help in stopping the attack. Rachel Jeantel, the girl who was on the phone with Martin, later said in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN that she believed Martin thought Zimmerman might be gay, rendering the attack a gay-bashing.

After enduring an attack estimated at more than 40 seconds in length Zimmerman drew his pistol and fired one shot in self defense. It was later proven in court that Zimmerman shot Martin in self-defense. The use-of-force expert who testified during the trial said that he was surprised that Zimmerman waited as long as he did to draw his gun and fire upon Martin, and that he would have been justified in doing so much earlier.

George Zimmerman was reacting to suspicious behavior, and did not know or care about the race of the person he was following. He did not initiate contact, and did not fire until well after he was attacked and well after he was legally justified in using his gun in self-defense. He did nothing criminally wrong the night he was forced to shoot Trayvon Martin, and only made the tactical mistake of leaving his vehicle and exposing himself to attack from a violent young predator.

The facts are in. The jury decided correctly. It is up to each individual whether to accept the clear facts, or stand on illogical emotion. Standing on emotion means helping perpetuate the race problem. Yes, it is sad that Martin was killed in this incident, but the facts show that he wantonly attacked Zimmerman, and Zimmerman had every right to defend himself against this unlawful, felonious, and deadly aggression.

Greensleeves Hubs 3 months agofrom Essex, UK

I remember the Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case quite well, as it received considerable publicity here in the UK, though I'm not familiar with the incident in Texas. If events were as presented, then these were indeed frightening examples of vigilantism, fueled perhaps by bigoted attitudes. But I won't comment further about either specific case as I don't feel my own knowledge is adequate.

Clearly there is a line to be drawn here. Everybody should have the right to defend themselves using 'reasonable' force (it is for the courts to subsequently decide whether the force used was reasonable or not). Equally, if private citizens see a crime being perpetrated they should feel able to intervene to prevent it, though they may be well advised not to, and they should obey any instructions from Law Officers.

The perception however is that too many in America still see themselves as individuals defending their territory in an 18th or 19th century frontier town. Today we live in a society with democratic government, independent judiciary and well-trained police officers. Those police officers may not always have all the resources they need, and they may not always operate to the standards we expect of them, but for any democratic society to flourish, respect for the officials who police it, must be upheld. The society's requirements in that sense must take precedence over a citizen's personal freedom to decide how the law should be upheld. Individuals taking the law into their own hands generally should be discouraged, and if they operate in ways which are unreasonably violent, then they are commiting a crime and should suffer the full penalty under the law just as any other criminal would.

Rodric Johnson 5 years agofrom Phoenix, Arizona

If is my understanding that Zimmerman complied but it was too late Trayvon had had his fill of the stalking and attacked. I listened to the 911 calling and Zimmerman did stop following. He should have never followed, but hind site is...you know.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Terry sez: Zimmerman was told not to follow but ignored that.

Jack replies: Zimmerman was under no legal, moral or ethical obligation to follow such a "telling."

Terry sez: It appears as though he liked being thought of as the "Captain" of the watch group and was just itching to create a situation where he could use his gun and be He wanted to be a cop but could not possibly pass the psych test.

Jack replies: It also appears that Terry is a mind reader, able to discern motives from the deepest recesses of a person's thoughts without any actual evidence.

Terry sez: There is no doubt in my mind that the need for weapons in this country is crazy.

Jack replies: There is no doubt in my mind that the need for weapons is very important when a thuggish, athletic teen football player hopped up with drugs in his system is on top of you, breaking your nose with mixed martial arts punches while beating your head against the sidewalk. But that's just my opinion.

Terry sez: I found the on going discussion between you and Jack was far too long

Jack replies: Some people have better ability to concentrate than others. Others get lost after the second "and" or "the."

Terry sez: and feel when a single person dominates the discussion I loose interest

Jack replies: Blame that on Cred. I demanded that no one else be able to answer or post on this thread and he agreed. That's how I came to "dominate" the discussion. This hub actually sends out a secret code to all computers reading it, locking up their keyboards and preventing anyone else from joining the conversation. I don't know why it didn't work on yours. We'll have to check the coding.

Terry.Hirneisen 5 years agofrom Shenandoah Valley

Zimmerman was told not to follow but ignored that. It appears as though he liked being thought of as the "Captain" of the watch group and was just itching to create a situation where he could use his gun and be He wanted to be a cop but could not possibly pass the psych test. There is no doubt in my mind that the need for weapons in this country is crazy.

I found the on going discussion between you and Jack was far too long and feel when a single person dominates the discussion I loose interest.

knight4444 5 years ago

thanks for posting your opinion Sooner28

Sooner28 5 years ago

I hope justice is served. I have a sneaking suspicion since Zimmerman's dad is a former judge that he will get off. If the idiot never would've followed Trayvon in the first place, no one would've died!

knight4444 5 years ago

I've find it interesting when you talk to the avenge black american it's always the same response zimmerman is a murderer, and when you talk with your avenge conservative its the tired old list of excuses for any black man to be slaughtered or beaten. This is reminding me of the rodney king beating, anybody with two functioning eyes could see that beating a man down after he's not even moving anymore is cruel and insane. I don't mean to generalize but it's really sick to listen to the party of limbaugh, fox propaganda network always automatically justify to murder or beatings of black people. The ridiculous insane nonsense that conservatives quite often assert is why so many minorities cry racism! Listen heres the facts, george zimmerman wasn't a police officer - george zimmerman was a security guard- george zimmerman was told be the police department NOT to follow the person in question, now please explain to me how can you claim self defense if you pursuing the the very person you claimed means to do YOU harm?? But your typical conservative somehow doesn't want to ponder that FACT!! Why didn't george zimmerman simply make the call to the police department and simply go home???? Yeah because anyone with COMMON sense knows george zimmerman was looking for a confrontation and george zimmerman knew he had a gun. The question is george zimmerman put himself in that position following Trayvon with one purpose in mind, confrontation!! is this racism? I'm not sure but I know one damn thing if Trayvon was a white kid george zimmerman would be in jail right now!! I think the police department is racist for sure, that's why the sheriff resigned!! But of course the party of limbaugh, fox propaganda network has the perfect excuse, as usual. In many parts of this country racism is very much alive and well, especially in the south and south west. But your typical conservative tries to sel people on this insane idea racism is dead!! and then they play they're juvenile games of if you call me a racist that's because your the racist by talking about it!! OMG!! insanity I remember way back when your typical conservative racist wasn't ashamed of themselves, they owned their racism and were proud! the 21 century racist says racist things but when confronted tries to reverse the roles LOL only in america!!!

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Oh and vote up because of the engaging conversations!! Good Job bringing discussion

The pleasure is all mine, Rodric!

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Hello, Rodric, thanks for dropping in and commenting on this article and the discourse therefrom.

You said:

I can tell you one thing, that article that you gave a link to Credence2 is the epitome of passive aggressive pseudo-psychology. My undergrad is in psychology (also my favorite subject)an my experience and knowledge tells me that the information in that work is based on assumption and no clinical trials.

In order for it to be valid and scientific there must be trials and the reporting of findings not just a survey. I would like to see the study conducted that determined what people thought sectioned by political factors as the article suggests. I would like to see the psychological journal where the findings are published.

I say:

I am certainly not qualified to judge the accuracy of the article, but in the face of articles provided by Jack, I guess my point is that that such positions and values are not so easy established between the ideologies, regardless of which ideological pole that you find yourself on.

You say:

It is prideful intellectualism that leads a person to think he or she is superior to others because of a perceived psychological difference which is based in conjecture. I can assure you that there is no great divide between liberals and conservatives. I am certain that if a study were to be completed, based on the many studies available, that conservatives and liberals are more alike than different.

I say:

I would not go so far as to say superior, but different is accurate. On the contrary, I think that there is a great divide between liberals and conservatives. Who would continue to say that the President is Muslim when he clearly states otherwise? Why the argument over his birth certificate, when it has been vetted at the highest levels of our government as a prerequisite to Obama taking office? What kind of reasoning is that? Who promotes fear of the media, all except Fox, of course? Who promotes anti=intellectualism by saying that a college education is a detriment to young people because of all those “liberal ideas”. Our society is at each others throats over the difference between indoctrination verses free inquiry as a manner of life. I don’t care for the political right and I do not deny it. I am open to discussion as to why I am wrong. I may not agree with you, but lets hear your explanation.

You said:

I can rewrite the same fiction that the author of that article wrote using examples from liberal bias to suggest Liberals are closed-minded and conservatives are not. I will give you examples.

Liberals tend to deny the existence of God because they cannot prove his existence but conservatives are more open to the idea that their is a God and are willing to consider the possibility.

I say:

That not the liberal position, denying the existence of God. The liberal resists the idea of “establishment” that we have to worship “your God” and not our own. The very basis of religious liberty is dismissed by the right in America if you are not Judeo-Christian. You and I both know that to be true…Who else thinks that children in public schools should be forced in organized prayer to the Christian God? I will decide who I will worship or not.

You say:

Also, liberals do not agree that a two parent home with heterosexual parents is important for the rearing of children, but conservatives are open to the idea that such a philosophy works, since it has worked for generations.

I say:

Liberals recognize that change is inevitable like the sunrise. Liberals accept that idea of inclusiveness, homosexual parents are better than none at all. Are there any studies that prove what it is you say about the superiority of heterosexual couples as compared to homosexual? Are conservatives willing to step up and adopt the myriads of children without any parents or guardians? I think not…

YOu said:

What I wrote above is misleading, just like the article you posted Credence2. I could go on, but it sickens me. I know better than to brand an entire group of people just to prove a point or win a disagreement. The author of that article does not apparently, which is why it is in an opinion section. .

I say:

Many of the rigid attitudes shown by conservatives are quite evident whether I deal one on one or within the national arena. You are most stimulating, tell me why I am wrong.

You said:

I hope you do not take this as an attack, because I in all honesty and humility do not imply that you are a gainsaying person. What I point out here is that your article link is based in a fallacy, not reality.

I say:

Not at all, I am intrigued and want to hear more as to why you think that rightwing folks are so misunderstood, if you hub on the topic, you have to let me know so that I can see your answer.

Rodric Johnson 5 years agofrom Phoenix, Arizona

Oh and vote up because of the engaging conversations!! Good Job bringing discussion!

Rodric Johnson 5 years agofrom Phoenix, Arizona

Nice argument.

I can tell you one thing, that article that you gave a link to Credence2 is the epitome of passive aggressive pseudo-psychology. My undergrad is in psychology (also my favorite subject)an my experience and knowledge tells me that the information in that work is based on assumption and no clinical trials.

In order for it to be valid and scientific there must be trials and the reporting of findings not just a survey. I would like to see the study conducted that determined what people thought sectioned by political factors as the article suggests. I would like to see the psychological journal where the findings are published.

It is prideful intellectualism that leads a person to think he or she is superior to others because of a perceived psychological difference which is based in conjecture. I can assure you that there is no great divide between liberals and conservatives. I am certain that if a study were to be completed, based on the many studies available, that conservatives and liberals are more alike than different.

I can rewrite the same fiction that the author of that article wrote using examples from liberal bias to suggest Liberals are closed-minded and conservatives are not. I will give you examples.

Liberals tend to deny the existence of God because they cannot prove his existence but conservatives are more open to the idea that their is a God and are willing to consider the possibility. Also, liberals do not agree that a two parent home with heterosexual parents is important for the rearing of children, but conservatives are open to the idea that such a philosophy works, since it has worked for generations.

What I wrote above is misleading, just like the article you posted Credence2. I could go on, but it sickens me. I know better than to brand an entire group of people just to prove a point or win a disagreement. The author of that article does not apparently, which is why it is in an opinion section. .

I hope you do not take this as an attack, because I in all honesty and humility do not imply that you are a gainsaying person. What I point out here is that your article link is based in a fallacy, not reality.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

jack replies: Well, FOX was reporting ACCURATELY exactly what an India newspaper story reported in India, where the trip was taking place. So far you've managed to prove that Fox reports accurately what other media report in their country.

And you REALLY think this compares to an outright lie from ABC, NBC and the others? This is the best you can do? Compare accurate reporting from Fox with lies?

Yes it does, Fox misinformation exceeds the error of the others. You can cut the spin, Jack. I saw the story, Fox treated that information as if it were fact and they knew that the outrageous figures quoted were lies, but they were more than content to spread them to give the rightwinger their serving of red meat.

I would have thought that after the "taking back the country" fiasco you got yourself into you would at least try to check your comments a little better for some semblance of reasonableness.

My comments are always reasonable, Jack, but your interpretation of them may very well not be so.

Jack repleis: Pointing to your sister who also took cookies once out of the cookie jar after your mom busts you for doing it a couple of dozen times is so third grade. You denied the media had an agenda. I proved that it did. Pointing to someone else for their perceived sins does NOTHING to contradict my point.

Ok Jack, does that include all media, your precious FoXNews as well. The media is about sensationailism, Fox included. I say your mouthpieces have an agenda as well. THERE, is my point. You may not trust the mainstream media, but I certainly don’t trust the FOX for being any more objective, just more bias from the other side. And if I had to select between media bias….

Jack replies: yes, because all those Republican candidates got voted in by Democrats.

jack replies: Well, FOX was reporting ACCURATELY exactly what an India newspaper story reported in India, where the trip was taking place. So far you've managed to prove that Fox reports accurately what other media report in their country.

And you REALLY think this compares to an outright lie from ABC, NBC and the others? This is the best you can do? Compare accurate reporting from Fox with lies?

I would have thought that after the "taking back the country" fiasco you got yourself into you would at least try to check your comments a little better for some semblance of reasonableness.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

cred sez: But what was FOX’s motivation

Jack repleis: Pointing to your sister who also took cookies once out of the cookie jar after your mom busts you for doing it a couple of dozen times is so third grade. You denied the media had an agenda. I proved that it did. Pointing to someone else for their perceived sins does NOTHING to contradict my point.

Cred sez: I think that I just did address it earlier

Jack replies: Nope... you totally, completely, 100 percent ignored the point of the first post, which is what you are attempting to do now. Thank God Al Gore invented scroll back along with the Internet, although you don't seem to take good advantage of it to double check your remarks. Your actual repsonse was "Jack, you present this rightwing rag as evidence?" And that was the best you could do.

cred sez: I am not talking about the candidates but the strongest block of GOP supporters

Jack replies: yes, because all those Republican candidates got voted in by Democrats.

cred sez: Nothing emotional or irrational about the announcement from the state of Florida,

Jack, I apologize for being missing in action. I recently changed my status from full retirement to semi-retired and find myself not having the time I use to. So to address your last comment….

Jack replies: I gave you two examples of purposeful misstatements from the MSM… so far you’ve given emotional responses back. Do you really think the blog readers don’t notice that?

Yes, Jack they know that you come to the defense of the absurd, yes NBC was out of line as for the reason that NBC did this, to make Zimmerman appear to have racist intent to his crime than what otherwise would be the case is noted. But what was FOX’s motivation for this little tirade? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o0jUknE3SM

I remember the story personally and do not have to dredge up ideological suspect sources to make the case here. So everybody does it. Your precious Fox is no less guilty than the others and most probably is more guilty than most. There are numerous other examples, but you do get the point, don’t you?

Jack replies: No… the “charge” is a matter of fact. Either the person said what they did… or they didn’t. You won’t address that because you can’t. It is a matter of public record that they said what they did. Either what they said was wrong… or it was right. There are no middle grounds on this particular example. And what they said was wrong, documented by numerous sources. You won’t address that because you can’t.

I think that I just did address it earlier and have acknowledged the error and the possible motivation for the misreporting by MSNBC, so what is the explanation for the FOX news blatant lie? Can you analyze that one for me with fact and reason?

Jack replies: I’ll defer to Scott Brown, senator from Massachusetts for that answer. Or maybe Sen. Kirk from Illinois. Perhaps Gov. Walker from Wisconsin has something to say. Or the Republican mayor of New York City.

I am not talking about the candidates but the strongest block of GOP supporters, look at the demographics, Jack. What do you see?

Since we have last conferred, the outcome that I stated was the minimally acceptable one in the Zimmerman case has in fact come to pass. Zimmerman has in fact been charged with Murder in the Second Degree as I said he should have been in the article. I certainly wasn't wrong about that, was I? Nothing emotional or irrational about the announcement from the state of Florida, so I guess that the Black Panthers can stand down. I am sure that we both agree that the State of Florida was not going to swayed by leftist bias in this case.

Until next time, Cred2

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Zimmerman is innocent until proven guilty. Stop saying he needs to be proven innocent.

This is not Medieval Europe!

Allright, Rodric29, point taken.....

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Well, cred, when ABC aired the tape that you claimed showed no injuries to zimmerman you refused to believe that ABC was in error because you felt the source of information was biased.

Here's a source that you simply cannot refuse to believe that also states ABC was in error and that zimmerman had multiple injuries. Who is this trusted source, you say?

Well, it's none other than ABC, doing a backtrack on their story once they realized they were busted by the web...

Cred sez: The charge is just matter of opinion from a source that has political bias,

Jack replies: No… the “charge” is a matter of fact. Either the person said what they did… or they didn’t. You won’t address that because you can’t. It is a matter of public record that they said what they did.

Either what they said was wrong… or it was right. There are no middle grounds on this particular example. And what they said was wrong, documented by numerous sources. You won’t address that because you can’t.

You react emotionally to the example, unable to analyze it factually and with reason. And my point stands to the fair minded Dear Readers who are following this.

Cred sez: you don't trust the entire mainstream media, why should I trust Fox and its henchmen? You are not convinced by the vast majority of the media outlets but you expect me to be convinced by "your source".

Jack replies: I gave you two examples of purposeful misstatements from the MSM… so far you’ve given emotional responses back. Do you really think the blog readers don’t notice that?

Cred sez: Fox News is the bigger bald face liar in the profession of journalism. Only the rightwingers say otherwise, all the more reason to distrust them.

Jack replies: Well, for the record I just gave two examples on this issue that we are discussing that showed the MSM are the “bald faced liars” and you’ve given ….[crickets chirping]. There’s an outstanding $10,000 reward offered for the first person who can document a “lie” that the Fox News Show has produced. It’s been there for several years now. Go for it, eh. Be richer tomorrow than you are today. But you can’t, can you. You simply cannot produce a single “lie” that the News Division has given. You’ll want to change the discussion to the “commentators” whose job it is to have opinions…

Cred sez: You have done that with mainstream media and from your rightwing window find it corrupt. I see the same thing with Fox News, zero credibility. Fox has contributed to this poisoning of the well, but from the otherside.

Jack replies: Still can’t provide any, you know, EVIDENCE to back up your ffffeeeelllliinnngggssss, eh.

Cred sez: Why are we paranoid, the GOP is fast becoming the party of bitter old southern white men, a dying breed to be sure.

Jack replies: I’ll defer to Scott Brown, senator from Massachusetts for that answer. Or maybe Sen. Kirk from Illinois. Perhaps Gov. Walker from Wisconsin has something to say. Or the Republican mayor of New York City.

Cred sez: If NBC is guilty, they should be held accountable for that failing in journalistic standards. But as you say with Zimmerman, lets have the investigation to determine who is culpable and what must be done. Let's not get emotional and jump to conclusions.

Jack replies: Still are not willing to discuss the “why” of NBC doing such a thing, eh.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

span sez: set free by their peers

Jack replies: Span is one of those who is still living in the 1950s.

SpanStar 5 years ago

Rodric29,

The two men that barbarically, gruesomely tortured and killed young Emmett Till were considered by many innocent before the trial and set free by their peers which included no black people on the jury. Only to have them confessed after the trial they were the savages that had committed such a heinous crime-I would say committing such acts like this medieval times can exist in present day.

Rodric Johnson 5 years agofrom Phoenix, Arizona

Zimmerman is innocent until proven guilty. Stop saying he needs to be proven innocent.

This is not Medieval Europe!

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: But you still had no answer for the charge, eh. Just another ho-hum attack.

The charge is just matter of opinion from a source that has political bias, you don't trust the entire mainstream media, why should I trust Fox and its henchmen? You are not convinced by the vast majority of the media outlets but you expect me to be convinced by "your source". Fox News is the bigger bald face liar in the profession of journalism. Only the rightwingers say otherwise, all the more reason to distrust them.

Jack replies: If the voice of God came down and gave you the answer you still would want to waffle on substantiation. :-)

Sorry, Jack, Fox News is hardly the voice of God, might be the voice of that other 'fellow' though. Fox News is not proof of anything

Jack says, And I still would like to know why you think a major news source would do something such as this. Maybe I wasn't that wrong after all, eh, when I said all we have to do is compare their reporting with reality to find if they are biased.

Jack says, And just how much do you think this kind of "poisoning the well" by the media can account for the hysteria and paranoia that many libs feel about the world around them.

You have done that with mainstream media and from your rightwing window find it corrupt. I see the same thing with Fox News, zero credibility. Fox has contributed to this poisoning of the well, but from the otherside.

Why are we paranoid, the GOP is fast becoming the party of bitter old southern white men, a dying breed to be sure. The arc is clearly in our direction, the demographics for the future, all of it. You keep on being seen as the anti-labor, anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-minority party, how long can you survive? All you have left is Elmer Gantry and Thurston Howell. You will have to turn that elephant mascot to a wooley mammoth? Ever heard of the Whig Party?

Jack says, You want substantiation... how about the washington post?

If NBC is guilty, they should be held accountable for that failing in journalistic standards. But as you say with Zimmerman, lets have the investigation to determine who is culpable and what must be done. Let's not get emotional and jump to conclusions.

cred sez: Jack, I came to my conclusion AFTER I read your suggested article and looked at the point of view of this 'publication'.

Jack replies: But you still had no answer for the charge, eh. Just another ho-hum attack.

Cred sez: I read the hollywood reporter article and if that did indeed happen, I am not in favor. But, I want it substantiated by more neutral observers, certainly not Fox News or some rightwing media center...

Jack replies: If the voice of God came down and gave you the answer you still would want to waffle on substantiation. :-)

And I still would like to know why you think a major news source would do something such as this. Maybe I wasn't that wrong after all, eh, when I said all we have to do is compare their reporting with reality to find if they are biased.

And just how much do you think this kind of "poisoning the well" by the media can account for the hysteria and paranoia that many libs feel about the world around them.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: Duly noted that you had no answer for the material and instead went directly to an ad homininem attack. As you have each time that you've been presented with material that upsets your world view.

Jack, I came to my conclusion AFTER I read your suggested article and looked at the point of view of this 'publication'.

I read the hollywood reporter article and if that did indeed happen, I am not in favor. But, I want it substantiated by more neutral observers, certainly not Fox News or some rightwing media center...

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Cred sez: Jack, you present this rightwing rag as evidence? I would give it as much credibility as you would give the Huffington Post...

Jack replies: Duly noted that you had no answer for the material and instead went directly to an ad homininem attack. As you have each time that you've been presented with material that upsets your world view.

Hope you do better with this one, but based upon prior response on your part, it won't happen. But please tell us, cred... if you were a person who heard this on NBC... would you know the truth of the event... or would you know a lie.

And if you would only know a lie... then you have to ask yourself "why" did NBC do what it did. If you're too embarrassed to answer that here on Hubpages... at least be honest enough to ask that of yourself in the privacy of your heart.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

you want an example of the outright lies the mainstream media uses... and in particular to this case... you need go no further than MSNBC...

Jack, you present this rightwing rag as evidence? I would give it as much credibility as you would give the Huffington Post....

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: I guess that since I am white, I obviously have bias issues I have to deal with, eh.

I sort of pick that up from your attitude and position on issues we have been speaking about. The reasoning behind your views. We all have to curb our tendencies toward bias. I do not know anyone who wears a halo in that regard.

Jack replies; Another one of your strawmen, eh. If I actally said, hinted, thought, or expressed that then you could claim it for whatever kind of reasoning you want. But I didn’t eh.

OK, Jack

Jack replies: You play the game well, (better than most, but not as good as me, though). Stay away from the strawmen arguments, though. It really does make your posts weaker. With them in I’d give you a “B”… if you take them out I’d raise it to “A-“.

I am touched, praise from a maestro is most gratifying. As a rightwinger, your desire for frank and honest interchange is unexpected from your group and appreciated. I certainly look forward to engaging in other topics like this. You have 'stood your ground' and have my respect for doing so, even if you are wrong.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

You’re paranoid, Jack. That is not what I read. Most of the right is clearly pro-Zimmerman, at least according to blogs and articles from their perspective that I have read. It is not simply the gun issue anymore. So, the rightwinger has made its own bed. But why should you be concerned, with the GOP record, most of us are not voting for you anyway.

No Jack, you can keep your pity and save it for yourselves and your rightwing buddies who lament because they are not able to keep the sun from rising in the east and setting in the west.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: Well, I don’t know of any right wing group that has offered $10,000 in bounty on any head, black or white, so comparing “rightwingers” and Black Panthers seems to be quite a stretch, eh.

None that you have heard of. Your white supremacist groups with the Government as the source of their endless doomsday rant are to be ignored? Hardly. All of them firmly entrenched in rightwing philosophy. Timothy McVeigh comes to mind. When I look over recent years, I don’t think the Panthers have been anywhere near as active. Nobody has to tell me who I need to be concerned about the most.

Embarrassed enough yet, cred? Or do you want me to go on?

Allright, Jack, you have made your point, and I will give you the point in this instance.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: Which is more likely... voter fraud or being struck by lightening?

So which is more likely, errant CCW or being struck by lightning? As to the mortgage bet, you would do well to take your own advice.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: Well, we can trust what you like to believe, or we can go with what the public editor of the New York Times believes…

The editor is one man as you are, I will gather may own facts and come to a different conclusion than the right-winger. One person’s opinion does not represent the objective reality like the rightwing fringe harping on the idea of Obama not being a citizen when this has been vetted at the highest levels of government. But, of course, the kooky right-winger seems to have this coveted knowledge that everyone else missed. No, I don’t have a great deal of confidence in anything a right-winger says and will demand high standard of proof before I accept any thing they advocate

Jack, says… I can quote you dozens more. Yes, the media has a tilt towards the liberal side and if a story can be slanted, it will be slanted.

Jack, there are plenty of rightwing rags, too. The New York Post for example. You have your National Review, etc. So it is not like the right does not have its voices. Why do you folks always say the media is liberal? What do they have against you? Better yet, why would they have anything against you? After all the owners of the major media outlets are among the aristocratic class that you folks bend knee to. Why would they undermine their own advantage? I still think it is just boogie man for you. Why are you people afraid of higher education, Hollywood and the media? But since the right indoctrinates and the left enlightens, it would it figure that the right is afraid of free inquiry and it shows at every level. Fear is your monike

Jack replies: How about when the “messenger” quits being an impartial “messenger” and decides to become part of the game, eh. And since he controls the “messages” he decides that he is going to tilt to the side that he likes, eh. What part of “not and equal and fair toe to toe exchange” do you have a problem with?

Well, Jack, A lot like Fox News? Fair and balanced? In a pigs eye….

Jack replies: Yes, I am saying that it is not a major issue that is approved by even a large minority of people. In any given country of 200,000 million people will you find some that do wrong. Yes, of course. When you find a perfect society my advice is for neither one of us to join it… we’d both take the perfection out of it fairly quickly. But again, and as you admit, it is not a SOP for large segments, and when it is found out, it is roundly condemned by the greater society. (Unless, of course, it is too the benefit of certain groups. For example, the University of California system racially profiles against Asians but that is acceptable.)

That is great Jack, just as long as it stays that way, we are watching. The situation with the UC system is unacceptable and should be called for what it is. I am not on both side of this issue to be politically expedient, I will take my firm stand.

Jack replies: What makes us calm and sane? Because we don’t base our decisionmaking and info processing off from 90 percent emotions, that’s why. We deal in reality, not what makes us ffffeeeeelllll ggggooooodddd.

From my point of view, you folks are the emotional ones. What you say is a cop-out not supported by anything other than your rightwing world view that the few are better than the many. The very antithesis of a democratic society.

Jack replies: Sure… the “view from the right” as presented by Mother Jones, The Nation, The NY Times and the Washington Post.

Well, Jack there are certainly plenty of deplorable rightwing rags just as prevalent that I would not think as worthy to be on my toilet paper roll.

Jack, says: But it make you feel good about railing against the law, and THAT was more than sufficient for you.

Is the pursuit of justice an emotional argument? If you right-wingers had your way this entire Martin affair would have never seen the light of day. I am willing to admit I make mistakes. But, if this precious law of yours makes it easier for future Zimmermans to shoot who ever they want, when ever they want with impunity, then I will support scrapping it in a New York Minute. Otherwise, you can keep it, is that a bit clearer?

Jack replies: Simple… just compare it to reality to see if there is a match. When a news reporter says, “this law allows X.” and the law clearly does NOT allow X then something is up. When you have a dozen reporters all getting it consistently wrong, and always from a leftist point of view, you know that something more than just “up” is happening.

And Jack, what make you the expert that can discern the truth in opposition to experienced journalists and Rhodes Scholars? Why are you right and EVERYBODY else is wrong? The wrong begins from the left by your point of view and I don’t buy it.

Jack replies: Possible, but quite a bit harder. You see, we don’t have CBSNBCABCCNNMSNBC, the universities, and virtually all major city newspapers, along with TimesNewweekO and most everything else. Look at all the reporters and law profs who were shocked, shocked, that the supreme court didn’t bow down and kiss the feet of Obamacare the past few days.

Jack after you presented the entire professional cadre as leftists agitators, who do you have as your hero, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and Sarah Palin? Where is your balance and reason,? These people are clowns. For the right-winger, the entire universe is its adversary and it really makes you folks look silly. We see what the court decides, we are all expecting a decision this coming June.

Jack replies: Going from Mother Jones to The Nation is not a “variety” of news sources, eh.

All your reading is fair and objective? I doubt it….. There is nothing worse than the rightwinger for whom the gospel can only be obtained from Fox News

Jack replies: And that is my point… they DO have… but you still have the rabble rousers and race-baiters such as Jackson and Sharpton who will claim every time it is solely and only because of “something” and nothing at all to do with the community trying to do the right thing.

It that what happened with Martin? It seems like you folks are really bothered by all those black folks getting riled up. Everybody should be riled up. Do you think that they live in a vacuum or are on a natural sedative? Yes, I want everybody riled up. Nobody is advocating violence, people think that we can not be riled up without acting unlawfully. So, no one is doing that, so what are you afraid of? Another unfortunate stereotype held by many. First Amendment give the people the right to peaceably assemble, am I right? Everyone else seems to avail themselves of that right when they have a point to make. Not much different as to how the right got all riled up over the Terry Shivo (sp) incident in Florida a few years ago. So you can take down your halo, Jack.

Jack replies: Doesn’t matter how small of a dog you are in the fight. Your words give direction to the actions of those who put the $10,000 bounty on Zimmermans head.

Your irrational fears give direction, Jack, not my words. The President weighed in reassuring the public that justice will be done in this case, not taking sides. I guess that makes him an advocate of the Panthers, too, eh, Jack? It seems for a lot of you folks, we are all Panthers under the skin, are we not? You seem to want to condemn the entire black community, except the Uncle Toms, by implying that they are Panther sympathizers. How would you like it if I said that instead of the Klan and skinheads being isolated occurrences, as so many of you always claim, that in fact each and every one of you are sympathetic to their goals and objectives even though you do not wear the sheets. What would you say to that, Jack?

Jack replies: You ominously threatened that something will be done… now that others have taken your word for it and have “done something” you can’t back out now.

Jack, I had no idea that my opinion and voice were so formidable…. The thing that I am ominously threatening is the need for justice in this case with all deliberate speed, any feet dragging and cover-ups are just to be brought out into the sunshine. Nothing wrong with that

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: As suspected...totally unable and unwilling to address the substance of the information. And BTW, as a former producer for CBS I can state with certainly that if you trust the "network news" for veracity you are a fool.

The only way I could be a bigger fool over taking some comfort in the fact that majority of the news outlets responsibly report the news is wathcing the newest network, JBS (the BS stands for Broadcast System. of course. With its affiliates of Sam Hill and Bob Owens, with a clear rightwing agenda and objective.

You dissemble before me, you must prove the accusations advocated by rightwing nuts in real world, the mere fact that you say it is so, is not good enough, sorry.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

you want an example of the outright lies the mainstream media uses... and in particular to this case... you need go no further than MSNBC...

Cred sez: You have bias issues of your own you have to deal with in spite of your having minority children.

Jack replies: I guess that since I am white, I obviously have bias issues I have to deal with, eh.

Cred sez: I guess that since I am black, I am obviously a supporter of the Black Panthers and its methods, puerile reasoning, don’t you think, Jack?

Jack replies; Another one of your strawmen, eh. If I actally said, hinted, thought, or expressed that then you could claim it for whatever kind of reasoning you want. But I didn’t eh.

Cred sez: I play fair and I like the idea just fine, so bring it on.

Jack replies: You play the game well, (better than most, but not as good as me, though). Stay away from the strawmen arguments, though. It really does make your posts weaker. With them in I’d give you a “B”… if you take them out I’d raise it to “A-“.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Cred: Nobody is making the analogy that because a man votes democrat that he does not have racial issues. That is not necessarily true.

Jack replies; You want to deny that this whole Zimmerman fiasco has been laid at the feet of the Republicans then go a head. Every major news story attempted to make this a republican plot against black people. And the shooter turns out to be a Democrat. Sometimes ya just can’t win, eh Cred.

Cred sez: Just because the right trots out an Alan Keyes or some other rightwing mouthpiece does not confer instant credibilty. Over 90% of our group seem to know what is happening. So what is the reason the GOP gets so little black support? Rightwingers in blackface are not going to win the day.

Cred sez: Clear this up for me, Jack, so that when folks thinks that it is time to revolt against the government, no one knows who has what?

Jack replies: It’s one of the many reasons why gun owners are against registration. There are other compelling reasons also, including the indisputable fact that states within the United States have already used gun registries to attempt to round up guns that they didn’t like. And that it cost Canada multiple billions of dollars and did not solve one single crime.

Cred sez: Is that not the ultimate desire? "Taking the country back", "lock and load", are they not as provacative as the Black Pantehrs? And these rightwingers go on with it 24/7. Taking the country back from whom?

Jack replies: Well, I don’t know of any right wing group that has offered $10,000 in bounty on any head, black or white, so comparing “rightwingers” and Black Panthers seems to be quite a stretch, eh.

But many firearm expressions are part of the normal vernacular and you probably use many yourself.

Son of a gun. Don't go off half- cocked. Quick on the draw. Keep your powder dry. "Bull's-eye", to describe an accurate deduction. "Double-barreled", to describe something which does two things at once, or has dual functions. "Pick off", a sniper's expression, to describe the easy elimination of an exposed and vulnerable target. A football expertly thrown a great distance is said to have been "rifled". When a man retires after campaigning vigorously for a cause, he is said to "Hang up his guns." A wild guess is called a "shot in the dark". To improvise quickly is called "shooting from the hip." A politician being stalked by investigative reporters is said to be "in the cross-hairs." A person who acts impulsively is called "trigger-happy."

Perhaps you can tell me which of these expressions are “provocative”.

And “take our country back”? Dunno… perhaps you can ask these good people about it. After all, they were particularly fond of the phrase during the Bush administration.

In declaring his run for the presidency, Howard Dean told a crowd in Burlington, Vermont, "You have the power to take our county back!" A little more than half a year later, when Dean was ousted from the Democratic primary, he said the same thing once again. Nine days later, he again said "I'll be doing everything that I can to make sure that John Kerry and John Edwards take this country back."

In fact, Howard Dean was such a fan of the phrase, he even wrote two books incorporating it into their titles: "You Have the Power: How to Take Back Our Country and Restore Democracy in America" and "Winning Back America". From whom? He doesn't say. But clearly he's a racist.

As is Hillary Clinton. Clinton opened her 2008 run for president by declaring the she would "take our country back."

Prominent Democratic strategists James Carville and Paul Begala coauthored a book in the run-up to the last presidential election titled "Take It Back: A Battle Plan for Democratic Victory."

And how about Katrina vanden Hevuel, editor of the far-left, near-bankrupt magazine The Nation penning a book titled "Taking Back America".

Liberal talk show host Thom Hartmann also use it. The title of his book, "We the People: A Call to Take Back America".

Embarrassed enough yet, cred? Or do you want me to go on?

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

cred sez: You know Jack, to change the subject a bit that is what we on the left complain about in regard to Voting. It appears that actual incidences of voting fraud are rare if any, but the right is adamant about promoting voting ID laws that disenfranchise the most vulnerable with its associated costs to state governments. So, what is excessive appears to be based on what side of the ideological ledger you are on?

Jack replies: Which is more likely... voter fraud or being struck by lightening?

Cred sez: Another irritant about the right is this conspiracy of theirs that the vast majority of media are opposed to their points of view/ “I like to believe” that the majority of stories emanating from the press are fair and accurate.

Jack replies: Well, we can trust what you like to believe, or we can go with what the public editor of the New York Times believes…

“I'll get to the politics-and-policy issues this but for now my concern is the flammable stuff that ignites the right. These are the social issues: gay rights, gun control, abortion and environmental regulation, among others. And if you think The Times plays it down the middle on any of them, you've been reading the paper with your eyes closed.”

“Deborah Howell, Post ombudsman from 2005 through 2008, said at the end of her tenure that “some of the conservatives’ complaints about a liberal tilt [at The Post] are valid.” I won’t quibble with her conclusion. I think she was right.”

And that is just two of the majors… I can quote you dozens more. Yes, the media has a tilt towards the liberal side and if a story can be slanted, it will be slanted.

Cred se: It is always convenient to shoot the messenger, or is it just an excuse when the right’s point of view cannot stand toe to toe in arena of ideas.

Jack replies: How about when the “messenger” quits being an impartial “messenger” and decides to become part of the game, eh. And since he controls the “messages” he decides that he is going to tilt to the side that he likes, eh. What part of “not and equal and fair toe to toe exchange” do you have a problem with?

Cred sez: Are you saying to me that racial profiling is not an issue in our society at this date and time? I never said that it was a national standard, but vigilance is necessary to make sure that this practice does not rear its head anywhere.

Jack replies: Yes, I am saying that it is not a major issue that is approved by even a large minority of people. In any given country of 200,000 million people will you find some that do wrong. Yes, of course. When you find a perfect society my advice is for neither one of us to join it… we’d both take the perfection out of it fairly quickly. But again, and as you admit, it is not a SOP for large segments, and when it is found out, it is roundly condemned by the greater society. (Unless, of course, it is too the benefit of certain groups. For example, the University of California system racially profiles against Asians but that is acceptable.)

Cred sez: Again, you folks always say that educated and prominent media sources are hysterical, what makes you rightwingers the calm and sane ones, huh?

Jack replies: What makes us calm and sane? Because we don’t base our decisionmaking and info processing off from 90 percent emotions, that’s why. We deal in reality, not what makes us ffffeeeeelllll ggggooooodddd.

Cred sez: Perhaps you have not being paying attention to the excesses of the right as promoted by your GOP presidential contenders?

Jack replies; Excesses, eh? They told me that if I voted for McCain that we’d have a law on the books that allows Americans to be shot on sight without any due process. I now find out they were correct, eh.

Cred sez: I simply don’t buy it. Believe me, I read the view from the right and still stand in opposition to its position on most everything as do millions of others in this country.

Jack replies: Sure… the “view from the right” as presented by Mother Jones, The Nation, The NY Times and the Washington Post.

Cred sz: It certainly is not because we all need to be educated as the rightwingers are the ‘smart ones’.

Jack replies: Never said you weren’t smart… just hyper-emotional in the way you (and other libs) process information and come to decision. The beginning of this entire thread is proof of that. You were ready to do away with the “stand your ground” law without knowing the first thing about it… how it influenced (if at all) this incident, and how it affected other incidents around the country. But it make you feel good about railing against the law, and THAT was more than sufficient for you.

Cred sez: How do you determine what is unnecessary and untruthful, let’s get it out in the open and apply the magnifying glass to see if such is truly the case.

Jack replies: Simple… just compare it to reality to see if there is a match. When a news reporter says, “this law allows X.” and the law clearly does NOT allow X then something is up. When you have a dozen reporters all getting it consistently wrong, and always from a leftist point of view, you know that something more than just “up” is happening.

Cred sez: I am not ‘very liberal’, but just left of center.

Jack replies: Yeah, if you consider the “center” to be Mother Jones. :-)

Cred sez: May I presume that you and the rightwing does not have an echo chamber of its own?

Jack replies: Possible, but quite a bit harder. You see, we don’t have CBSNBCABCCNNMSNBC, the universities, and virtually all major city newspapers, along with TimesNewweekO and most everything else. Look at all the reporters and law profs who were shocked, shocked, that the supreme court didn’t bow down and kiss the feet of Obamacare the past few days.

Cred sez: You are not the only one that reads a variety of news sources.

Jack replies: Going from Mother Jones to The Nation is not a “variety” of news sources, eh.

Cred sez: Where does the arrogance come from that you are the paragon of rationality while the left are all nuts?

Jack replies: Well, since I never once said that the “left are all nuts” we’ll consider that one of the strawman arguments that you drop quite regularly into your posts. I am not responsible for answering what I didn’t post.

Cred sez: You cannot prove your point objectively, so I don’t buy it. Maybe it is not the liberalism milk excuse, but that all of these reporters have got it right and you have it wrong, did you consider that as a possibility. It is not like you are there to witness it all, is it? What you ‘bet’ is wrong

Jack replies: It’s easy… I compare reality to what they are writing/saying. It becomes quite easy to see what and where they are wrong.

Cred sez: Then, I expect the police to have other identifying factors outside of the perp having a blue bandana and orange stripes or having a black skin. When everybody is wearing the same thing, we are going to have to be a bit more selective on who we round up and on what basis.

Jack replies: And that is my point… they DO have… but you still have the rabble rousers and race-baiters such as Jackson and Sharpton who will claim every time it is solely and only because of “something” and nothing at all to do with the community trying to do the right thing.

Cred Sez: Fine, Jack, but that is what you say. Sarah Palin represents a major political party; I don’t put the words of an extremist political outfit like the Panthers on the same level.

Jack replies: Doesn’t matter how small of a dog you are in the fight. Your words give direction to the actions of those who put the $10,000 bounty on Zimmermans head.

Cred sez: My words speak of the unacceptability of inaction on this case; it is not a dog whistle. Y

Jack replies: You ominously threatened that something will be done… now that others have taken your word for it and have “done something” you can’t back out now.

Cred sez: You are in your own echo chamber to make this kind of interpretation.

Jack replies: Nope… just playing the same game that is always played against conservatives when an individual or group does wrong. Even if you’re not at fault in any way… it is possible that you might be by some wild stretch of the imagination so that is as good as if you posted the reward yourself.

Cred sez: You have bias issues of your own you have to deal with in spite of your having minori

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Dee, thanks for dropping by. Yes, indeed, I have been busy with this one.

In this hub we have tried to explore the issue from both sides, me giving as good as I get.

Nice to see you again, regards, Cred2

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

cred sez: So who the hell is Bob Owens?

Jack replies: As suspected...totally unable and unwilling to address the substance of the information. And BTW, as a former producer for CBS I can state with certainly that if you trust the "network news" for veracity you are a fool.

Dee aka Nonna 5 years ago

I was away for a minute I come back and you have been busy. I have some catching up to do.

This one makes me sick to my stomach...any way they try to spin it it still smells fowl. One of the first things said is Trayvon Martin was unarmed and the tapes they played of the 911 call was clear that Mr. Zimmerman was told to wait for the police. The picture of both Trayvon and Zimmerman make it look like Zimmerman probably outweighted Trayvon by a few pounds.

Nothing good about this one...and nothing good will come from this. First thing out of my mouth when I heard the news report is.....OMG, here we go again.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack, So who the hell is Bob Owens? I see by the nature of his articles that he is just another rightwing ditto-head. Why should I give him credibility over ABC news? Is this the kind of rational thinking you rightwing types refer to? Well, you going have to do better. Bob Owens, indeed!

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

cred sez: Jack, Have you heard the latest, it appears that the video immediately after the fatal confrontation with Martin seems to indicate no physical injuries to Zimmerman, let us see where we go now....

Former NAACP leader C.L. Bryant is accusing Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton of “exploiting” the Trayvon Martin tragedy to “racially divide this country.”

“His family should be outraged at the fact that they’re using this child as the bait to inflame racial passions,” Rev. C.L. Bryant said in a Monday interview with The Daily Caller.

I reply:

Jack, Have you heard the latest, it appears that the video immediately after the fatal confrontation with Martin seems to indicate no physical injuries to Zimmerman, let us see where we go now....

Nobody is making the analogy that because a man votes democrat that he does not have racial issues. That is not necessarily true.

Just because the right trots out an Alan Keyes or some other rightwing mouthpiece does not confer instant credibilty. Over 90% of our group seem to know what is happening. So what is the reason the GOP gets so little black support? Rightwingers in blackface are not going to win the day. It is an ineffective ruse as alternative for the party offering proposals that actually address concerns of Black America

WD, the whole idea of the right the to carry presumes that most desire access to firearms without registration or the government being aware of who has what weapon in any way. Clear this up for me, Jack, so that when folks thinks that it is time to revolt against the government, no one knows who has what? Is that not the ultimate desire? "Taking the country back", "lock and load", are they not as provacative as the Black Pantehrs? And these rightwingers go on with it 24/7. Taking the country back from whom?

I think that its 19th century, but again that is me.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: One example out of millions does not a crises make. I can give you a dozen stories from the past week alone about law enforcement officials who have been convicted of various crimes. Yet, each one is an individual and is not sufficient to tar the entire LEO community. Please don't do the same to those of us who have played the game properly and law abdingly, and who carry.

You know Jack, to change the subject a bit that is what we on the left complain about in regard to Voting. It appears that actual incidences of voting fraud are rare if any, but the right is adamant about promoting voting ID laws that disenfranchise the most vulnerable with its associated costs to state governments. So, what is excessive appears to be based on what side of the ideological ledger you are on?

Jack replies: I'm sorry, but I have misplaced what you are mentioning. Was it Indiana? I did remark on that and gave you the status of honorary Hoosier. But if it is somehthing else you'll have to remind me

Your comment regarding this is found as part of this thread see: 3 days ago it began like this....

Here's a question (or two or three) for ya, Cred...

In Indiana it is perfectly legal for a citizen who has a license to carry a handgun (about 400,000 Hoosiers at last count) to carry the handgun openly and visibly in public. We can duct tape it to our forehead if we want to, but it is generally not advised to do so

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Well, WD, if you want to claim that it is "common sense" to make the 99.9 percent of gun owners who never have a problem with their gun to spend billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of hours to take a course they never need then you have a completely different concept of "common sense" than the rest of humanity.

But please continue posting. If reinforces my claim about emotions ruling the debate on your side.

WD Curry 111 5 years agofrom Space Coast

Jack - So it is not a good idea to have gun owners take a course and get a license? It isn't necessary because of statistics? It is necessary from common sense.

Beyond-Politics 5 years agofrom The Known Universe (beyond.the.spectrum@gmail.com)

It's not so much guns and the gun owners. Its the hard heart which kills.

WD sez: If you want to own a gun, you should have to do the same to get a license. The way it is now, people who can’t even ride with training wheels are driving in a NASCAR race.

Jack repplies: Approximately 80 MILLION gun owners in America.

If only TEN PERCENT of the gun owners were out of control goofballs that threatened or actually harmed people then that would mean that there would be at least 8 MILLION goofball or bad events happening each year. Are there? No... of course not.

If only ONE PERCENT of the gun owners gun owners were out of control goofballs that threatened or actually harmed people then that would mean that there would be at least 800,000 goofball or bad events happening each year. Are there? No... of course not.

If only ONE TENTH OF ONE PERCENT of the gun owners were out of control goofballs that threatened or actually harmed people then that would mean that there would be at least 80,000 goofball or bad events happening each year.

And that's about right if you add up all the murders and other thuggery where guns were used.

That means, realistically, you are safe and sound around 99.9 percent of ALL gunowners. I don't think you can make that assertation about any other group of like minded people.

It also means that only one tenth of one percent of gun owners are goofballs and/or thugs. This means that WD wants well over 79 million people to be forced to spend billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of hours in "training" to solve a problem that only he sees.

Now... that is not even counting the concept that "safety training" is in any way going to stop a bad person from doing bad things with a gun. He'll just do them safer. Using WD's logic we should not have any possible bank robber using a car for a getaway vehicle since viturally everyone has gone through a drivers education course at some time. Of course, we should not have any accidents either but we'll give him a pass on that.

But the idea he expressed makes WD ffffeeeeellll gggooooodddd and that is all that counts. Logic is not a real high priority here, Dear Readers.

And as a side note, God help our national defense if this is the best the Academy is turning out these days.

WD Curry 111 5 years agofrom Space Coast

When I wanted a rifle, my Dad made me take all of the NRA courses and qualify expert in the NRA marksmanship program. At the Naval Academy, I qualified expert in every weapon I put my hands on. I hunt with a 20 gauge and do better than most with a 12.

If you want to own a gun, you should have to do the same to get a license. The way it is now, people who can’t even ride with training wheels are driving in a NASCAR race.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

cred sez: I used to own a gun once, so I am no stranger to the concept. There are not bodies lying all over the place as you say. But in Arizona where no training where no training was required and obviously no background check was made on a man with a semi automatic weapon who killed and injured many in Tucson in Jan 2011

Jack replies: One example out of millions does not a crises make. I can give you a dozen stories from the past week alone about law enforcement officials who have been convicted of various crimes. Yet, each one is an individual and is not sufficient to tar the entire LEO community. Please don't do the same to those of us who have played the game properly and law abdingly, and who carry.

cred sez: BTW, You never told me how I did on the hypothetical circumstance that you wanted me to comment on...

Jack replies: I'm sorry, but I have misplaced what you are mentioning. Was it Indiana? I did remark on that and gave you the status of honorary Hoosier. But if it is somehthing else you'll have to remind me.

WD Curry 111 5 years agofrom Space Coast

Trayvon was standing his ground.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack, Kristoff is wrong, you are experiencd in this area, granted, but there is a great deal that you don't know.

I stand corrected as you are in the position to speak on THIS ISSUE with authority and I can see that you have have been careful not to introduce your ideological

bias.

I used to own a gun once, so I am no stranger to the concept. There are not bodies lying all over the place as you say. But in Arizona where no training where no training was required and obviously no background check was made on a man with a semi automatic weapon who killed and injured many in Tucson in Jan 2011.

I am always going to be concerned and watching, as long as the trend continues as you say, ok.

Left is emotional and right is rational? I sincerely doubt it.

BTW, You never told me how I did on the hypothetical circumstance that you wanted me to comment on....

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

cred sez: You know, that is why I question a lot of these CCW laws, people get emboldened and feel invincible not to have to take the common sense precautions that they normally would if they did not have this gun.

Jack replies: With over six million people in dozens of states for decades we ought to be able to find hundreds of thousands of dead people shot by these embolded, non-common sensical CCW holders... or even tens of thousands... or thousands? But we can't, can we.

That's because your description is 180 degrees off the mark. It's as if a six year old on his first two-wheeler with training wheels still attached is trying to describe what it is like being a NASCAR driver.

I know thousands of CCW holders across the country. Some of my clients for my marketing firm are amoung the largest, most active pro-gun organizations out there. And your description of the CCW is utter balderdash. Complete tripe.

You will not find a group of people that are more thoughtful of the dangers of a gun and who are less likely to feel invincible.

Who do you think knows better about the penalties for misusing a firearm... the person who is carrying one and knows, KNOWS, that if he draws and uses it it will probably cost him tens of thousands of dollars for his defense... or someone such as you who doesn't own a gun and knows next to nothing about them.

Who do you think knows better about the penalties for misusing a firearm... the person who is carrying one and knows, KNOWS, that if he draws and uses it it will probably cost him years in prison, if not his entire life... or someone such as you who doesn't own a gun and knows next to nothing about them.

Who do you think knows better about the penalties for misusing a firearm... the person who is carrying one and knows, KNOWS, that if he draws and uses it it might cost him his family, his peace of mind, and the approbation of society/friends... or someone such as you who doesn't own a gun and knows next to nothing about them.

I've seen CCW holders turn and walk away from insults that would have you gibbering on the floor, ready to do battle. They know they simply cannot afford to lose their temper over an insult, a stupid remark, being cut off in traffic.

I KNOW that I carry the opportunity for instant and painful death in my pocket. Do you really think that I am going to risk everything that I have, everything that I am, just because a "provocation"? That I am going to put myself into a position where I might have to defend myself deadly force when I could walk away and avoid even the whiff of possibility.

And I am not different from the 99 percent of the other CCW holders out there. And if want to dispute that then you're going to have to find those hundreds of thousands of dead bodies killed by CCW holders.

You're not aware that the standard teaching in CCW classes is "if you won't go into an area without your gun, then don't go into it WITH your gun."

You're not aware that the standard advice in CCW classes is "if you fire a gun you WILL go to jail and you WILL spend $100,000 to defend yourself."

You're not aware that the most respected firearms trainer in America teaches that we should carry a spare wallet with junk in it so we can "throw it on the ground at the mugger and then run like hell."

Yet you comment anyway about "CCW holders" and how we are.

Your self admitted anger issues are causing you to project on to others as an emotional outlet.

The study that Kristoff referenced was absolutely correct.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Barnsey, so kind of you to drop by and comment on the article

You said: If the stand your ground law applied I would not have gotten in trouble at all, is that right? If it had applied back then I might have pulled a knife in self defense more often then, rather than trying to fight hand to hand against greater numbers and/or bigger/older foes.

Absolutely, the law is intended to protect you in the situation that you have described. You were minding your own business not looking for a confrontation. The officer was out of line in confronting you. I would stand with you in this case completely. As you could only guess the intent of the assailants, when confronted with superior numbers and weapons, I would have to shoot first and ask questions later. I am glad that you came out of that in one piece. My point being that biases and misappropriate and unprofessional behavior by law enforcement is not something that is completely unheard of…..

You are one with a conscience, I have had compassion where it is possible for me to do so and not take a course of action which is well within my rights to take see:

You said: That being said this leaves me in the clear minority. Clearly the african americans who are shooting one another daily in all of the cities in this country have no compassion. Many of them are heartless and cruel individuals who cannot be dealt with. Where does this leave the common people?

It is bad and I do not defend the thugs and the culture that continue to promote the attitudes and behavior.

You said: If you understand that as fundamentally true then you will realize horn had been waiting a long time for his chance to be a hero and put a bullet in somebody. Its just a natural desire to strike out in righteous indignation. We all have it. I am not saying it is right. I know what I am and how inherently angry I am. Having a gun would not be a good idea for a person like myself. Sadly, there are millions just like me polishing their guns and counting their bullets in hopes that their moment to shine will be arriving soon.

As I have trying to tell Jack, this man was just looking for an excuse to kill when he was in no danger personally. People look for an opportunity to act out their frustrations with a society and it problems in a way that will let their hands remain clean and they remain unpunished. What an opportunity this Horn fellow had. We descend to barbaric level of the rightwinger when we place property interest over human life.

You know, that is why I question a lot of these CCW laws, people get emboldened and feel invincible not to have to take the common sense precautions that they normally would if they did not have this gun. People are frail and fearful and may kill out of a provocation they support but may well not under examination have existed or they could have avoided.

Thanks again for your discourse on the topic, Cred2

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

barnsey sez: Your conservative mindset of sacrificing the few to satisfy the herd is archaic and no longer has place in a civilized society.

Jack replies: I honestly have no clue as to what barns is posting about.

Barnsey 5 years agofrom Happy Hunting Grounds

Having lived in some tough neighborhoods as a youth I can tell you for sure things would have been different if there was a stand your ground law. I was once brought into the station as a juvenile for nothing more than frightening off a huge gang of black kids that were assaulting a friend and I with bricks, bottles, rocks and whatever else they were throwing at us. We were across the street from them, I pulled a knife and stomped one foot on the ground and they all took off running! At that point should I have chased them down and sliced them to ribbons? As it was here in Jersey we were not allowed to stand our ground. Little did I know a black police officer was watching the entire altercation and didn't see fit to intervene until I pulled the knife. We were walking, heads down, knife placed back in my pocket, when the cop jumped me from out of nowhere.

In this example you find several confusing issues but no one cared about my rights, I was a long haired juvenile carrying a knife.

If the stand your ground law applied I would not have gotten in trouble at all, is that right? If it had applied back then I might have pulled a knife in self defense more often then, rather than trying to fight hand to hand against greater numbers and/or bigger/older foes.

As a compassionate human being I can say for sure that I am glad that never happened. I have felt intense regret upon delivering a solid beating to someone, even when they absolutely deserved it and I had no other option. I cannot imagine the guilt of actually killing someone over something so trivial as territory or pride.

That being said this leaves me in the clear minority. Clearly the african americans who are shooting one another daily in all of the cities in this country have no compassion. Many of them are heartless and cruel individuals who cannot be dealt with. Where does this leave the common people?

While I think town watches are a good idea as extra eyes for the police I do not think they should be carrying guns. The temptation to start shooting someone must be great, are we not human beings? Can you not watch things from a distance? Must you confront the suspect at all? I don't think so. Zimmerman called the police and that should have been the end of it.

As for the Horn story I would like to point out another fundamental truth. Home owners, I am one myself, take pride in what they have worked for. When I first moved in my home my sweetheart asked me about security and I replied, "I hope somene tries something on my property! I have been waiting all my life for the legal right to put a hurtin' on somebody! Oh, please, please try to break into my house!"

I am not a gun owner but how frightening would those words sound if coming from one? What if I told you most male home owners are thinking along those lines as well? If you understand that as fundamentally true then you will realize horn had been waiting a long time for his chance to be a hero and put a bullet in somebody. Its just a natural desire to strike out in righteous indignation. We all have it. I am not saying it is right. I know what I am and how inherently angry I am. Having a gun would not be a good idea for a person like myself. Sadly, there are millions just like me polishing their guns and counting their bullets in hopes that their moment to shine will be arriving soon.

Thanks for listening, for the most part I back everything you say credence, while Jack Burton from Big trouble in little China, while your constant supply of statistics is enlightening they mean nothing to the individuals you choose to ignore. Your conservative mindset of sacrificing the few to satisfy the herd is archaic and no longer has place in a civilized society.

Love others as you do yoursef and soon you'll find no place for discord. This should apply to all people, not just those who are neighbors. To every citizen of this great country, not just a certain sector. When good men stand by and do nothing there is great evil in the world. Acceptance of any kind should be reviled.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack, you are right, of course, let's not get ahead of the evidence.

But that is Zimmerman's story, lets see how that corroborates with evidence that is independent of his statements. I does not seem likely to me that a boy running away from someone would suddenly confront the person whom is is fearfully eluding.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: In my reading of the event, which was not exhaustive, it appears that the police/prosecutor had a great misunderstanding of the stand your ground law and misapplied it, killing any further investigation. I don’t think it was based upon racism on their part, I think it was ignorance. In general, I have found many prosecutors who are one step removed from stupid.

Cred reply: OK

Jack replies: Pretty good. You’re welcome to come here and be an honorary Hoosier and carry a handgun all day long. In the interest of self disclosure, while I have a license to carry I do not, and don’t foresee in the future, being one of the “open carriers” that are around town.

I too, welcome you to the Aloha State, but you will have to put your gun away!

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: There’s a balance… and to have any kind of trust in our justice system I have to believe that that balance is mostly carried out. We can all point to isolated incidents, and even isolated departments/cities where it is out of balance. But that doesn’t change the fundamentally good system that we have developed.

Jack, what have you to believe does not necessarily mean that it is so, since you are not a direct observer. Vigilance is what is required to insure that what it is ‘that we like to believe’ is in fact what is happening.

Jack replies: Why, yes I do think most of them are fiction… made up from whole cloth in many liberals/progressives minds who are operating from pure emotion, fueled by a national media with an agenda and the ink to make its point.

Another irritant about the right is this conspiracy of theirs that the vast majority of media are opposed to their points of view/ “I like to believe” that the majority of stories emanating from the press are fair and accurate. It is always convenient to shoot the messenger, or is it just an excuse when the right’s point of view cannot stand toe to toe in arena of ideas.

Jack replies: And you have yet to offer any proof that this “preponderant determinant” is the actual way this is in effect in 2012. This is not 1955. Isolated incidents do not make a national standard operating procedure.

Are you saying to me that racial profiling is not an issue in our society at this date and time? I never said that it was a national standard, but vigilance is necessary to make sure that this practice does not rear its head anywhere.

Jack replies: “concern” eh. No real facts, though. Not on the way the law was actually written instead of “reported” or on the way the way it was being interpreted by the officials. I am “concerned” about a lot of things, but I try to keep my feet grounded in reality, and not what the hysterical media is reporting about “conservatives” and their sins. I have no choice but to read the liberal point of view about “truth” if I want to read any newpapers and magazines. But I doubt that you actually get to read the conservative take on what is “truth.” As a consequence, because you only live in a one-sided echo chamber, it’s hard for you to understand what the real world is like. It’s a problem that many liberals have.

Again, you folks always say that educated and prominent media sources are hysterical, what makes you rightwingers the calm and sane ones, huh? Perhaps you have not being paying attention to the excesses of the right as promoted by your GOP presidential contenders? I simply don’t buy it. Believe me, I read the view from the right and still stand in opposition to its position on most everything as do millions of others in this country. It certainly is not because we all need to be educated as the rightwingers are the ‘smart ones’.

Jack replies: Sure she did… AFTER the media whipped up unnecessary and untruthful reporting frenzy about it.

How do you determine what is unnecessary and untruthful, let’s get it out in the open and apply the magnifying glass to see if such is truly the case. Just another sample of my problems with the right, if you please

Cred shows us an example of how this takes place…he knows what HE believes… conservatives are the bad guys.. . so obviously conservatives must believe the exact opposite. It’s reflexive, emotional thinking. I know I have beat that drum considerably on these posts, but how else can you describe it.

The positions taken by the right on most of the issues I am concerned about are not my positions. You can say the same about liberals and you have. I am not ‘very liberal’, but just left of center. I am not talking about mandating women putting probes in their private parts prior to their obtaining abortion. You folks are the ones out of whack. You guys are just as emotional and reflexive as you accuse us of being, but from the opposite side of the pole.

Jack replies: I would certainly encourage you to move a little away from the echo chamber that reinforces your beliefs so strongly. As noted, I have to read or watch media such as the Washington Post, the New York Times and most others, where those reporters sucked in liberalism with their mother’s milk. It gives us an insight to how liberals think and reason every single day. But I’d bet that the balance of what you know and read about conservatives is rarely taken directly from the source, but instead is filtered through those very same liberal opinion makers.

I guarantee that you’ll be surprised at what you find out.

May I presume that you and the rightwing does not have an echo chamber of its own? You are not the only one that reads a variety of news sources. Where does the arrogance come from that you are the paragon of rationality while the left are all nuts? You cannot prove your point objectively, so I don’t buy it. Maybe it is not the liberalism milk excuse, but that all of these reporters have got it right and you have it wrong, did you consider that as a possibility. It is not like you are there to witness it all, is it? What you ‘bet’ is wrong

Jack replies: I don’t know that you made your position as clear as what you think you might have made it. Perhaps you might want to go over what you wrote and double check since I am apparently failing to see what you see as clear. If couild be my fault, but I don’t think so. :-)

Thanks Jack, I will do that.

Jack replies: But what are we going to do, cred, if/when it turns out that the mode of dress for the majority of those criminals we are looking for all are wearing a blue bandana with orange stripes?

Then, I expect the police to have other identifying factors outside of the perp having a blue bandana and orange stripes or having a black skin. When everybody is wearing the same thing, we are going to have to be a bit more selective on who we round up and on what basis. If the color and manner of dress can be considered an individual choice and it reasonably narrows the search rather than open it up to accosting everybody in town that has a black skin, wears a t-shirt and pair of trousers that is fine with me.

Jack says: But when the police DO pick people up who are wearing a hoodie, to cry that he was ONLY picked up for wearing a hoodie is disingenuous.

No, Jack, that is not what I say, I agree with the progression in your paragraph and the conclusion that you drew.

Jack replies: Don’t know… still sounds like profiling on your part. And prejudice.

I disagree

Jack replies: Quite easy… Palin puts what appears to be crosshairs on a dozen democrat candidiates (quite similar to what democrats put in their advertising by the way, which the media never mentioned.) After Giffords gets shot then the democrats and media spends weeks demonizing the conservatives for our “tone” and “willingness to promote violence”. If it is good for the conservatives, it is good for you too. Your words are obviously a dog whistle for those such at the Black Panthers, giving them the necessary cover to seek to kill Zimmerman. I realize that you may not like that idea much, but we certainly want to play the game fairly on both sides, eh.

Fine, Jack, but that is what you say. Sarah Palin represents a major political party; I don’t put the words of an extremist political outfit like the Panthers on the same level. My words speak of the unacceptability of inaction on this case; it is not a dog whistle. You are in your own echo chamber to make this kind of interpretation. You have bias issues of your own you have to deal with in spite of your having minority children. I guess that since I am black, I am obviously a supporter of the Black Panthers and its methods, puerile reasoning, don’t you think, Jack? I play fair and I like the idea just fine, so bring it on.

Thanks again....

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

As always... it is generally good not to get ahead of the evidence...

With a single punch, Trayvon Martin decked the Neighborhood Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law enforcement authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.

"That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been no reports that a witness saw that initial punch Zimmerman told police about."

and...

"Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.

"Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police.

"Zimmerman fell to the ground and Trayvon got on top of him and began slamming his head into the sidewalk, he told police."

[how about that... first time I ever ran hubpages out of pixels with an answer.]

Cred sez: Thats fine, be as I have reiterated often, slow is not stop. If attention had not been brought to this case" "stop" is what we would have ended up with. And, of course, that won't do. All deliberate speed, with emphasis on proper procedure, of course.

Jack replies: In my reading of the event, which was not exhaustive, it appears that the police/prosecutor had a great misunderstanding of the stand your ground law and misapplied it, killing any further investigation. I don’t think it was based upon racism on their part, I think it was ignorance. In general, I have found many prosecutors who are one step removed from stupid.

Cred sez: Limbaugh sucks, but then that is my opinion too.

Jack replies: That’s okay… as long as we agree he’s not a rabble rouser because he has a network program.

Cred sez: You obviously know quite a bit about CCW issues, lets see how I score.

Jack replies: Pretty good. You’re welcome to come here and be an honorary Hoosier and carry a handgun all day long. In the interest of self disclosure, while I have a license to carry I do not, and don’t foresee in the future, being one of the “open carriers” that are around town.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Cred: But it also means that you do not stop every black man in Gary for questioning, a straw man?, perhaps for my protection and those of the innocent, I want the concept of reasonable suspicion interepreted in a narrow way.

Jack replies: There’s a balance… and to have any kind of trust in our justice system I have to believe that that balance is mostly carried out. We can all point to isolated incidents, and even isolated departments/cities where it is out of balance. But that doesn’t change the fundamentally good system that we have developed.

Cred sez: Jack, do you think that these faults in the right's interpretation of these ideas are science fiction?

Jack replies: Why, yes I do think most of them are fiction… made up from whole cloth in many liberals/progressives minds who are operating from pure emotion, fueled by a national media with an agenda and the ink to make its point.

Cred sez: I SAID that those that use this as the preponderant determinant to making the call for probable cause or reasonable suspicion is in error.

Jack replies: And you have yet to offer any proof that this “preponderant determinant” is the actual way this is in effect in 2012. This is not 1955. Isolated incidents do not make a national standard operating procedure.

Cred se: There were more than one concern with legal residents of Hispanic descent in Arizona being detained and harrassed without otherwise any real evidence on its face that they were in the country illegally.

Jack replies: “concern” eh. No real facts, though. Not on the way the law was actually written instead of “reported” or on the way the way it was being interpreted by the officials. I am “concerned” about a lot of things, but I try to keep my feet grounded in reality, and not what the hysterical media is reporting about “conservatives” and their sins. I have no choice but to read the liberal point of view about “truth” if I want to read any newpapers and magazines. But I doubt that you actually get to read the conservative take on what is “truth.” As a consequence, because you only live in a one-sided echo chamber, it’s hard for you to understand what the real world is like. It’s a problem that many liberals have.

Cred sez: Let's not be naive, these things have been known to happen as the State's governor had to go out of her way to reassure all of the state's residents that the law to be applied properly.

Jack replies: Sure she did… AFTER the media whipped up unnecessary and untruthful reporting frenzy about it.

Cred sez: What about the airline account that I left on a post. Because so many of us have been victimized, we can never see the world in terms of 'Sheriff Taylors and Barney Fife as so many of you folks do.

Jack replies: You must be confusing us with some other “folks.” My crowd is regularly accused of being “cop bashers” because we demand accountability and control over people who have the instantaneous power to kill us with their guns.

Cred sez: We are naturally going to be not as trusting of the institutions, always having to be active in making sure things are done correctly.

Jack replies: In his NY Times column of the other week, noted liberal Nicholas Kristoff stated outright that “Liberals, especially those who described themselves as “very liberal,” were least able to put themselves in the minds of their adversaries and guess how conservatives would answer.”

Cred shows us an example of how this takes place…he knows what HE believes… conservatives are the bad guys.. . so obviously conservatives must believe the exact opposite. It’s reflexive, emotional thinking. I know I have beat that drum considerably on these posts, but how else can you describe it.

Cred sez We have a come a long way and I can live with compromises that you agree to, but we both had to come away from our diametrically opposed poles a bit. Saints be praised, that it is possible to reason with rightwinged folks... Rather than being pugnacious, we found common ground through reasoned dialogue...

Jack replies: I would certainly encourage you to move a little away from the echo chamber that reinforces your beliefs so strongly. As noted, I have to read or watch media such as the Washington Post, the New York Times and most others, where those reporters sucked in liberalism with their mother’s milk. It gives us an insight to how liberals think and reason every single day. But I’d bet that the balance of what you know and read about conservatives is rarely taken directly from the source, but instead is filtered through those very same liberal opinion makers.

I guarantee that you’ll be surprised at what you find out.

Cred sez: I dont argue with you, in my previous post I made my position clear in regards to this.

Jack replies: I don’t know that you made your position as clear as what you think you might have made it. Perhaps you might want to go over what you wrote and double check since I am apparently failing to see what you see as clear. If couild be my fault, but I don’t think so. :-)

Cred sez: No dispute here, Jack there is a difference in methodical process based on relevant evidence to support reasonable suspicion that has nothing to do with my black skin and the hoodie I wear. One is relavent and fine police procedure, the other is not. I applaud you, we are on the same page here.

Jack replies: But what are we going to do, cred, if/when it turns out that the mode of dress for the majority of those criminals we are looking for all are wearing a blue bandana with orange stripes? When we round up the people based on the pictures, what happens when the local preacher starts in haranguing us for obvious discrimination against people who blue bandanas with orange stripes for no reason. After all, we just brought 18 of them to the station house to be questioned.

And what are we going to do, after six of the eight stores that were robbed told us that the perp was wearing a blue, orange stripped bandana when we see a person wearing one approaching another “we buy gold” stores? Ignore them as a coincidence?

I can post thousands of stories where a crime was committed by a young, black person wearing a hoodie. Does this make everyone wearing a hoodie a potential criminal. No, of course not. Does it make a hoodie a component of crime. No, either. Should police pick someone up just for wearing a hoodie. No, of course not.

But when the police DO pick people up who are wearing a hoodie, to cry that he was ONLY picked up for wearing a hoodie is disingenuous.

Cred sez: There is a big difference in my expressed disdain toward the pollitical right in general, and attitudes, when put into action adversely affect the lives of others, big difference. We are all free to BELIEVE what we want.

Jack replies: Don’t know… still sounds like profiling on your part. And prejudice.

Cred sez: How about elaborating on this a bit, if you please.

Jack replies: Quite easy… Palin puts what appears to be crosshairs on a dozen democrat candidiates (quite similar to what democrats put in their advertising by the way, which the media never mentioned.) After Giffords gets shot then the democrats and media spends weeks demonizing the conservatives for our “tone” and “willingness to promote violence”.

If it is good for the conservatives, it is good for you too. Your words are obviously a dog whistle for those such at the Black Panthers, giving them the necessary cover to seek to kill Zimmerman. I realize that you may not like that idea much, but we certainly want to play the game fairly on both sides, eh.

Cred sez: Thats fine, be as I have reiterated often, slow is not stop. If attention had not been brought to this case" "stop" is what we would have ended up with. And, of course, that won't do. All deliberate speed, with emphasis on proper procedure, of course.

Jack replies: In my reading of the event, which was not exhaustive, it appears that the police/prosecutor had a great misunderstanding of the stand your ground law and misapplied it, killing any further investigation. I don’t think it was based upo

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

WD, thanks for dropping by, I will make a note to check it out. Cred2

WD Curry 111 5 years agofrom Space Coast

It took me almost an hour to work my way down here. If you want the straight poop, I wrote a hub about it. We know what happened.

If you live here in Florida, you might want to keep a fire arm handy. No telling when some kook will start shooting up Walmart. I don't, but I can bust a move.

As far as racial relations. We have come a long, long way, but we aren't there yet.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Here's a question (or two or three) for ya, Cred...

Good idea, Jack, lets check it out! I might pick up a thing or two from a rightwinger...

You obviously know quite a bit about CCW issues, lets see how I score.

Based on the things you and I spoke about and under the conditions that you provided for the state of Indiana

The law allows for one to carry a firearm in plain site, as a result the police have no right to harass him as he is law abiding according to law of that state.

Reasonable suspicious can fall upon the carrier if a gunshot is heard in the vicinity or he is otherwise detained for some other offense, he could be asked to identify himself which may extend to his presenting his license to carry. If there is probable cause or reasonable suspicion determined on a basis not having anything to do with the firearm on his hip, he can be detained and arrested for carrying without a valid license. Otherwise, leave him alone.

Jack says:

Does this change with the clothing that the person is wearing. Does the guy in the suit and tie strapping a gun get a pass, while the unshaven person wearing dirty clothes circling the playground get a visit from the cops?

Are both behaving lawfully? Neither should be disturbed

Jack says

What do you want the 911 operator to do when they get a MWAG call? (man with a gun). Tell the caller to bugger off, it's perfectly legal? Send a police officer to investigate even without any pc or ras?

Tell the caller to bugger off, as it is perfectly legal

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: Again, and I don’t understand a reason for you to be doing this, you completely disregard that profiling is ONE of many tools the police, and all of us, use to come to decisions and to take actions

I dont argue with you, in my previous post I made my position clear in regards to this.

If I am investigating a string of robberies at “we buy gold” stores then you tell me… am I first going to pull sheets on people who are known for retail robberies… or am I first going to pull sheets on people who are known for breaking and entering homes late at night? Should I be “impartial” and only pull every third crime sheet just to make sure that I am being “fair” to the criminal community? Or maybe just pull ten sheets at random?

No dispute here, Jack there is a difference in methodical process based on relevant evidence to support reasonable suspicion that has nothing to do with my black skin and the hoodie I wear. One is relavent and fine police procedure, the other is not. I applaud you, we are on the same page here.

There is a big difference in my expressed disdain toward the pollitical right in general, and attitudes, when put into action adversely affect the lives of others, big difference. We are all free to BELIEVE what we want.

Jack replies: I see quite a bit of the language you employ as leading directly to the lynch mob mentality for those of a less refined ability to discern nuances

How about elaborating on this a bit, if you please.

Jack replies; I would settle for righteous justice over swift justice. Haste makes waste – and decisions made to satisfy a time clock might not be the decisions made to satisfy where the evidence leads.

Thats fine, be as I have reiterated often, slow is not stop. If attention had not been brought to this case" "stop" is what we would have ended up with. And, of course, that won't do. All deliberate speed, with emphasis on proper procedure, of course.

Limbaugh sucks, but then that is my opinion too. My profile speaks of my support of the progressive left, I am not hiding anything. But, I will reason with the right when we can find common ground.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack replies: No,.. we see it as an acceptable part of life. I can guarantee you that if a report comes over the police radio in Gary Indiana that a liquor store was knocked over the police are not going to go roust the Carmalite nunnery down the street to see if the 80 year old nuns in the home are perhaps guilty. Neither are they going to drive to Lowell, 80 miles south to see if the Dutch dairy famers have anything to do with the crime.

I reply:

But it also means that you do not stop every black man in Gary for questioning, a straw man?, perhaps for my protection and those of the innocent, I want the concept of reasonable suspicion interepreted in a narrow way.

Jack replies: Sure you can “find is a despicable practice” since what you are describing as profiling is not really what people do when they are profiling. I can call a dog a cat… but I’ll never get it to meow. As noted much earlier, profiling is nothing more than matching experience against reality, and it is ONE tool that police, and everyone uses to make decisions. Your pretense that it is the ONLY tool that police use is beneath a person as bright as you… and is a sign that you’ve let your emotions slip into charge of your thoughts again.

Jack, do you think that these faults in the right's interpretation of these ideas are science fiction? Hardly, I SAID that those that use this as the preponderant determinant to making the call for probable cause or reasonable suspicion is in error. There were more than one concern with legal residents of Hispanic descent in Arizona being detained and harrassed without otherwise any real evidence on its face that they were in the country illegally. Let's not be naive, these things have been known to happen as the State's governor had to go out of her way to reassure all of the state's residents that the law to be applied properly.

What about the airline account that I left on a post. Because so many of us have been victimized, we can never see the world in terms of 'Sheriff Taylors and Barney Fife as so many of you folks do. We are naturally going to be not as trusting of the institutions, always having to be active in making sure things are done correctly.

Nobody wants to tie the hands of police in doing their job, but our experience with an official representative of system has not always been good enough to allow us to give the institutions the benefit of the doubt.

We have a come a long way and I can live with compromises that you agree to, but we both had to come away from our diametrically opposed poles a bit. Saints be praised, that it is possible to reason with rightwinged folks... Rather than being pugnacious, we found common ground through reasoned dialogue...

Thanks, Cred2

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Here's a question (or two or three) for ya, Cred...

In Indiana it is perfectly legal for a citizen who has a license to carry a handgun (about 400,000 Hoosiers at last count) to carry the handgun openly and visibly in public. We can duct tape it to our forehead if we want to, but it is generally not advised to do so.

With our trusty six-shooter strapped to our side for everyone to see we can legally walk into Walmart, the local bank, the college campus, the kiddie playground at the park and the street in front of your home (if you lived in Indiana, that is.)

Now... I am not asking for what you think of the wisdom of this law. I am asking what do you think the police should do when they see someone walking around with a gun strapped to their side. Again... it is fully, and perfectly legal for a citizen to do so IF he has a license to carry. If he does not have a license to carry... he is committing a felony. The police cannot tell just by looking to know who is legal... and who is not.

So... cred... what would you want the policeman to do when he sees a person walking around such as that. Totally ignore them? Pretend they don't exist? Ask them if they have a license even if there is no pc or ras? (If so, do you also think the police should ask every person they see driving a car if they also have a license.)

Does this change with the clothing that the person is wearing. Does the guy in the suit and tie strapping a gun get a pass, while the unshaven person wearing dirty clothes circling the playground get a visit from the cops? Does the middle aged white man standing in a church parking lot get stopped while the young black male in a hoodie walking towards a liquor store gets a pass? Or do they both get stopped to be fair? Or passed?

What do you want the 911 operator to do when they get a MWAG call? (man with a gun). Tell the caller to bugger off, it's perfectly legal? Send a police officer to investigate even without any pc or ras?

These are questions that citizens are living with in dozens of states that also allow open carry. I really would like to hear your opinion, not of the open carry law itself, but how the law officials should act towards those who are doing nothing but obeying the law in every action.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Cred sez: Your experiences, nor mine necessarily constitute a universal reality as 2 +2=4. You, I, Span and even Jesse Jackson have our biases and stereotypes, as human beings this is part of what we are. All of our noses run as well, but we don’t want others to see them dripping in public, so we wipe it. As a law enforcement professional, not just a fellow on the street,I have the obligation to put my biases and stereotypes on the shelf and impartially enforce the law. That’s not rocket science, is it?

Jack replies: Again, and I don’t understand a reason for you to be doing this, you completely disregard that profiling is ONE of many tools the police, and all of us, use to come to decisions and to take actions.

If I am investigating a string of robberies at “we buy gold” stores then you tell me… am I first going to pull sheets on people who are known for retail robberies… or am I first going to pull sheets on people who are known for breaking and entering homes late at night? Should I be “impartial” and only pull every third crime sheet just to make sure that I am being “fair” to the criminal community? Or maybe just pull ten sheets at random?

Cred sez: What was it Gerraldo Rivera spoke about saying that the hoodie that Trayvon was wearing was just as much a culprit as Zimmerman? Is it more red meat for a right wing audience? I used to think that Gerraldo was cool until he sold out to Fux News for the standard 30 pieces of silver.

Cred sez: My reply: Jack, of course, a lynch mob from any ideological direction is not what I want.

Jack replies: I see quite a bit of the language you employ as leading directly to the lynch mob mentality for those of a less refined ability to discern nuances.

Cred sez: But I emphasize that I should not have to choose between a lynch mob or have what appears to be injustice not acted upon. Neither is acceptable,I am reasonable and will take the middle way.

Jack replies: Most of us do want swift, sure, and righteous justice. I’ve agitated my fair share of cases where it wasn’t happening. But we should be sure we are getting an attempt at justice, not mob justice.

Cred sez: The President, yesterday, without taking sides and hearing the throngs nationwide, emphasized the need for swift justice in this case and he is to be commended.

Jack replies; I would settle for righteous justice over swift justice. Haste makes waste – and decisions made to satisfy a time clock might not be the decisions made to satisfy where the evidence leads.

Cred sez: BTW, Sharpton has his own news commentary program on MSNBC, hardly the rabble rousing individual that is considered the anathema of the ‘right’

Jack replies: I was going to ask Tawana Brawley about that but I misplaced her phone number. We can ask former New York Mayor David Dinkens but after being called a “n—ger whore turning tricks in City Hall” by Sharpton he might not react so kindly. Or, we can ask the young Jewish man in Crown Heights who was killed in a riot that Sharpton incited… but that might prove difficult since he is, unfortunately, dead.

But that’s okay… because now, by your standard, with Limbaugh having his “own news commentary program” on the EIB network he is hardly the rabble rousing individual that is considered the anathema of the ‘left.’

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Cred sez: My mission in life is to flush out rightwingers,

Jack replies: Flush out, eh. Not like we are hiding out in the bush somewhere.

Cred sez: I never thought that Jack and I were going to come to agreement in this case.

Jack replies: I think we have much in agreement. Let me list them and you then can feel free to point out where I am in error.

We agree that self defense to save a life is an honorable thing.

We agree that unless the authorities have probably cause (pc) or it’s weaker cousin, reasonable articulable suspicion (ras) they should leave you alone to do your business as you see fit.

We agree that police authorities who “make up” pc or ras to hassle someone are a disgrace to the freedoms that we all have and should not wear a uniform.

We agree that Zimmerman most likely overstepped any kind of boundary that the average, reasonable citizen would recognize as existent.

We agree that it may be impossible to determine with certainty just what happened that night.

We agree that if it can be shown by the legal standard of beyond reasonable doubt that Zimmerman shot and killed this young man for no reason that he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

We agree that it is far better to let the law work itself out, however imperfectly, than to have mob actions in the streets that endanger any potential innocents.

We agree that if Zimmerman is found innocent, or not guilty, in a court of law by his peers that this is the way the system works. Same as it worked for OJ.

Cred sez: My bigggest problem with Jack and "the right" is how they cling to the concept of profiling as an acceptable part of law enforcement.

Jack replies: No,.. we see it as an acceptable part of life. I can guarantee you that if a report comes over the police radio in Gary Indiana that a liquor store was knocked over the police are not going to go roust the Carmalite nunnery down the street to see if the 80 year old nuns in the home are perhaps guilty. Neither are they going to drive to Lowell, 80 miles south to see if the Dutch dairy famers have anything to do with the crime.

Cred sez: I deplore profiling and find it a dispicable practice, that again reflect laziness, not doing complete police work, thereby demostrating a lack of civility by failing to respect the Constitution,

Jack replies: Sure you can “find is a despicable practice” since what you are describing as profiling is not really what people do when they are profiling. I can call a dog a cat… but I’ll never get it to meow. As noted much earlier, profiling is nothing more than matching experience against reality, and it is ONE tool that police, and everyone uses to make decisions. Your pretense that it is the ONLY tool that police use is beneath a person as bright as you… and is a sign that you’ve let your emotions slip into charge of your thoughts again.

Cred sez: which the right is always saying is constantly violated by the left, not recognizing that is a man is innocent until proven otherwise.

Jack replies: Which has nothing to do with investigating a crime… otherwise no one would ever be able to be investigated.

Cred sez: Being detained or confronted by law enforcement had better be based upon reasonable suspicion or probable cause that the person being stopped is involved in some sort of crime, that goes beyond being black and wearing a hoodie.

Jack sez: AFTER a crime occurs the police detain or confront a lot of people. Lots. That is completely different from walking up to a person with no reason at all and giving them grief. An investigation is just that. Investigating and following leads and hunches. I was caught up in an investigation once for the sole reason that I was white, about the right size, and in the neighborhood. Being the good libertarian that I am I pointed out to the wanna-be hard-ass cop that I probably would be a lot more cooperative AFTER he told me why he was asking me the questions he was asking me. If not, he could pretty much kiss off. He did, and I cooperated.

But as I noted, and as you apparently do not want to confront, there is a difference between a person walking down the street and a cop hassling them without pc and ras… and a cop doing an investigation.

Cred sez: As I said before these issues are rearing their ugly heads in Arizona with Hispanics and with those that subscribe to Islam faith. The evolved sensibility in these matters, which is represented by the left, find these tactics very disturbing

Jack replies: Dunno… sounds to me as if you are majorly profiling here.

Cred sez: We can choose to dress as we wish without attracting police harassment, whether we are Muslim, skinheads of black teenagers...

Jack replies: But we cannot dress as we wish without attracting police notice. That is reality.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack sez: We all profile, every day, in many different ways. Both about situations and about people. It’s called matching our experiences with the reality that we are living in.

My reply: Your experiences, nor mine necessarily constitute a universal reality as 2 +2=4. You, I, Span and even Jesse Jackson have our biases and stereotypes, as human beings this is part of what we are. All of our noses run as well, but we don’t want others to see them dripping in public, so we wipe it. As a law enforcement professional, not just a fellow on the street,I have the obligation to put my biases and stereotypes on the shelf and impartially enforce the law. That’s not rocket science, is it?

What was it Gerraldo Rivera spoke about saying that the hoodie that Trayvon was wearing was just as much a culprit as Zimmerman? Is it more red meat for a right wing audience? I used to think that Gerraldo was cool until he sold out to Fux News for the standard 30 pieces of silver.

Jack says, What would you say if the KKK now put a $10,000 bounty on HIS head the same as on zimmerman? That the KKK ~really~ wasn’t “advocating violence.”

My reply: Jack, of course, a lynch mob from any ideological direction is not what I want. But I emphasize that I should not have to choose between a lynch mob or have what appears to be injustice not acted upon. Neither is acceptable,I am reasonable and will take the middle way.

The President, yesterday, without taking sides and hearing the throngs nationwide, emphasized the need for swift justice in this case and he is to be commended. This constitutes a strong and just as subtle message to Florida that the progress in the case will watched closely.

BTW, Sharpton has his own news commentary program on MSNBC, hardly the rabble rousing individual that is considered the anathema of the ‘right’

Cred2

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Greetings, SpanStar,

My mission in life is to flush out rightwingers, try to get their point of view on all manner of issue and see if it has any merit in the general discussion. I consciously do this over all issues of contention between us. Just as left and right are diametrically opposed, I never thought that Jack and I were going to come to agreement in this case.

My bigggest problem with Jack and "the right" is how they cling to the concept of profiling as an acceptable part of law enforcement. What heppened to Trayvon could have easily happened to me, if I were wearing a hoodie. I deplore profiling and find it a dispicable practice, that again reflect laziness, not doing complete police work, thereby demostrating a lack of civility by failing to respect the Constitution, which the right is always saying is constantly violated by the left, not recognizing that is a man is innocent until proven otherwise. Being detained or confronted by law enforcement had better be based upon reasonable suspicion or probable cause that the person being stopped is involved in some sort of crime, that goes beyond being black and wearing a hoodie. As I said before these issues are rearing their ugly heads in Arizona with Hispanics and with those that subscribe to Islam faith. The evolved sensibility in these matters, which is represented by the left, find these tactics very disturbing

We can choose to dress as we wish without attracting police harassment, whether we are Muslim, skinheads of black teenagers...

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Cred sez: I am troubled here, Jack. Just because there were many incidents of burglary committed by black males even if reported by a black person does not make profiling acceptable. Profiling is not to be done be done by law enforcement in its duties and certainly not by a flunkie like Zimmerman.

Jack sez: We all profile, every day, in many different ways. Both about situations and about people. It’s called matching our experiences with the reality that we are living in.

Why… someone once even said in a speech, "There is nothing more painful to me ... than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved."

The problem is when profiling becomes a substitute for critical thinking. Any “easy way” to get from point A to point F, G, or H in logic and reasoning is going to get a person in trouble. It’s a tool, amoung a group of other valuable tools, for all of us to make determinations about situations.

Cred sez: Zimmerman would have done himself a favor and let the boy on his way without interference

Jack replies: Yeah… but Zimmerman was a flawed human being with internal problems that had him on the path to potential destruction. Tragically he took someone else down with him.

Cred sez: I don't think so, no one is advocating violence,

Jack replies: Cred, my friend, I just showed you where some people are advocating just that. What are you going to say if in the next few days Zimmerman shows up dead? That the $10,000 “bounty” had absolutely nothing to do with it? There is a story yesterday from Indiana where a black man was just found innocent by a jury of shooting two white thugs based upon his claim of self defense. What would you say if the KKK now put a $10,000 bounty on HIS head the same as on zimmerman? That the KKK ~really~ wasn’t “advocating violence.”

Cred sez: I hear you, Jack, but all of that does not justify Dirty Harry or "Star Chamber" tactics.

Jack replies: And no one is asking for either… but what we are asking for is that the revolving door of the jail be closed so that a dangerous person with multiple felonies for either property crimes or personal crimes not be out walking the streets. Since those kinds of people mostly prey on the weaker, the more helpless I would suspect that you would want the same thing if you thought about it more.

Cred sez: But there are many more, I included, based on experience that see them as those bringing attention to wrongs

Jack replies: I was going to ask Tawana Brawley about that but I misplaced her phone number.

Cred sez: I welcome your opinion and dialogue as it keeps things lively, where would we be without you?

Jack replies: Well, span is forthcoming with his second opinion on that point. :-)

The report from Wikipedia that this Zimmerman has been charged with resisting arrest with violence and battery on the police in 2005. It also states this Zimmerman has been accused of domestic violence by his fiancée. The Wikipedia article talks about the police may have missed a racial slur pertaining to call by Zimmerman, not exactly sure what that means about missing a racial slur.

Based upon what I've read this Zimmerman is no stranger to violence whether it be he fighting the police or domestic violence in the home.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Best you can do, eh, Span... :-)

SpanStar 5 years ago

Creedence2,

I thoroughly believe you're wasting your breath with this John Burton whose personality is self-indulgent, and he is oblivious to the truth.

His ignorance of the truth right directly in front of him is a clear indication he has only one agenda his own.

He denies evidence right before his eyes and proves absolutely nothing himself.

I do believe one can actually get more out of a granite rock than they can from this John Burton.

I am through indulging this John Burton megalomania egotistical personality for it is lame and useless.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

did see the little smiley face at the end of my sentence, didn’t you.

Sorry, Jack, missed the smile shrouded in punctuation.

Jack, in regards to the threats from the Black Panthers, I stand my ground, I am opposed to vigilantism from either side. I do not advocate their approach. But, I should note, that in the article I saw this morning it appears that protests are ongoing from Tampa to Seattle. I want to correct that: They are occuring from Tampa to Honolulu, the great blue state of Hawaii is weighing in. People are obviously concerned.....

Jack replies: Zimmermans neighbor, who happens to be black, said that there are many crimes being committed in the area and most of them are being done by black teens. You didn’t know that, did you.

I am troubled here, Jack. Just because there were many incidents of burglary committed by black males even if reported by a black person does not make profiling acceptable. Profiling is not to be done be done by law enforcement in its duties and certainly not by a flunkie like Zimmerman. Zimmerman would have done himself a favor and let the boy on his way without interference

You said, Personally, I think it is a logical outgrowth of your previous statements such as “Well, we had better find the truth, this is not going stand as it is.” Now, don’t get me wrong… I am not saying that you’re encouraging such behavior, but I am saying that there are many who are taking your basic attitude a step too far

I don't think so, no one is advocating violence, but we are strongly suggesting that the wheels of justice not stand still, don't forget that if it were not for the agitators why were we to believe than anything was going to be done? My basic attitude is that I want something done about it and it should not take eons of time to get with it. We are not keen to trust Florida to do the right thing without public pressure as it obvious based on the police chief's voluntary stepping down, that someone got caught with their britches down....

Jack replies: When was the last time you read a news account where someone was walking around with a couple dozen felonies on their records but the courts let him out to prey on even more people? We might even have to go back a day or two to find such an amazing story. We are getting pretty far afield from the original post but you really need to know that law-abiding, innocent citizens are getting past the point of being fed up with this kind of “justice.” If the courts did their work properly would we even need a neighborhood watch?

I hear you, Jack, but all of that does not justify Dirty Harry or "Star Chamber" tactics.

Jack replies: I am not sure what you mean is “matter of opinion.” There is no doubt that Jackson and Sharpton are both lightning rods and controversial. I know many black people who despise them both.

But there are many more, I included, based on experience that see them as those bringing attention to wrongs that otherwise would have found themselves buried by the very law enforcement charged with enforcing the law with impartiality. They stir up the pot and often times, it needs to be stirred up....More of them means, I get to identify more that are caught with their britches down, and it serves a deterrent to the adversary to make sure their actions above board or else have a relentless spotlight put upon you.

Jack replies: Pretty much agree with you… but you need to know that zimmerman’s own lawyer says that the stand your ground doesn’t apply in this case

Jack, I may to come around to agree with you on a point that was provided in one of your linked articles, Zimmerman may have been acting outside of the Stand Your Ground provision, if such is the case he only has his statement of self-defense to fall back on and lets face it, it does not look very convincing. I trust, based on this revelation, an arrest is in the making soon.

Jack, I read the article you suggested, sounds reasonable on its face. In spite of it, I think that Zimmerman has an uphill battle to prove that he was acting in self-defense and was not provoking as an aggressor.

I welcome your opinion and dialogue as it keeps things lively, where would we be without you?

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Span sez: Clearly Jack Burton you're caught up in your own self deluded fantasies. I doubt seriously if you could see injustice if you're 5 feet away from it.

Jack replies: I know that you are getting frustrated because you simply have none of the evidence necessary to prove a single point you try to make, but taking your frustrations out on me is not going to give you that evidence, now is it.

Span sez: Millions of the people across this country can see what you have closed your mind to why in fact I believe Mr. Ray Charles can even see better than you.

Jack replies: Well, span, if “millions of people can see it” then you should be able to present that clearly seen evidence here on Hubpages for everyone to see for themselves. But you can’t, can you.

Span sez: This Zimmerman you profess is an awful good guy is out in the public

Jack replies: You obviously have me confused with another poster. I have said nothing about Zimmerman being a “awful good guy” or a “awful bad guy.” Perhaps you can explain to us where you think you found me “professing” this. Be specific. Give detail.

Span sez: with a concealed weapon illegally stopping people simply because he has it in his mind that he has a right to-NO HE DOESN'T!

Jack replies: Well, I am glad that you agree with cred and me but you’re a little late to that particular ball game.

Span sez: Your point about teenagers committing crimes that's been going on before you and I were born so

Jack replies: Glad to see you face some amount of reality.

Span sez: does it mean we vilify and label all teenagers, because that sound like what you're saying!

Jack replies: You can vilify and label anyone you want… but it helps to have actual evidence to back up a claim, eh. And you’re welcome to point out where I implied, hinted, stated or posted that we vilify and label all teenagers. But be specific. Give detail.

Span sez: Clearly your mind is closed and no communication can take place when people are not communicating-let me save you the trouble my mind is close also!

Jack replies: Why does in not surprised me that your mind is closed… and as far as my mind being closed – are you in the least familiar with the psychological condition known as “projecting”?

Span sez: Continue to cling which you illusions and I will join with the people who do not think like you.

Jack replies: You mean the people who make accusations such as you do with no means, no proof, no evidence to back up the accusations? That’s jake by me if you want to hang out with that crowd.

[Cred… sorry to get a little snarky on your Hub with a vistor but some folk just can’t handle a reasonable conversation.]

SpanStar 5 years ago

Clearly Jack Burton you're caught up in your own self deluded fantasies. I doubt seriously if you could see injustice if you're 5 feet away from it.

Millions of the people across this country can see what you have closed your mind to why in fact I believe Mr. Ray Charles can even see better than you.

This Zimmerman you profess is an awful good guy is out in the public with a concealed weapon illegally stopping people simply because he has it in his mind that he has a right to-NO HE DOESN'T!

Your point about teenagers committing crimes that's been going on before you and I were born so does it mean we vilify and label all teenagers, because that sound like what you're saying!

Clearly your mind is closed and no communication can take place when people are not communicating-let me save you the trouble my mind is close also! Continue to cling which you illusions and I will join with the people who do not think like you.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Here is a very thoughtful review of the issues surrounding this incident from legal professor, Eugene Volokh.

Dr. Volokh is a high respected authority on firearms and social issues and is considered by all sides to always have something important to say when he says it.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Cred sez: That is a matter of opinion.

Jack replies: I am not sure what you mean is “matter of opinion.” There is no doubt that Jackson and Sharpton are both lightning rods and controversial. I know many black people who despise them both.

Cred sez: I do not want vigilantism from either side, lets give the law the opportunity to work. I want an impartial investigation done promptly with advocates on each side making sure that the main players are honest throughout the process. But if there is wrong doing, I want Zimmerman arrested as a violator of the law and/or the law reviewed and reevaluated as to whether there is a shortcoming allowing for future Zimmermans to commit homicide with impunity.

Jack replies: Pretty much agree with you… but you need to know that zimmerman’s own lawyer says that the stand your ground doesn’t apply in this case.

You may not have taken my word for it but it is harder to ignore what his own lawyer is saying in interviews.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Cred sez: I guess I have to consider “socialist” synonymous with civility. Why do rightwing folks always scream ‘socialist’ regardless how inappropriate the word is in this circumstance?

Jack replies: Dunno… perhaps because it was a joke… you did see the little smiley face at the end of my sentence, didn’t you.

Jack replies: Actually, many states do allow lethal force in defense of property. Texas in odd in that lethal force of defense of property is legal after dark, but not during the daylight. It appears that Hawaii is rather weak on the subject.

Cred sez: You were the one saying ‘be patient and let the wheels of justice turn’. Report it and let the police deal with it.

Jack replies: Vast difference in kind between the defense of self and property and the court and justice system.

Cred sez: I can’t abide vigilantism from either side of the ideological divide.

Jack replies: Really? Then perhaps you can share with us your feelings about this….

“SANFORD — Members of the New Black Panther Party are offering a $10,000 reward for the "capture" of George Zimmerman, leader Mikhail Muhammad announced during a protest in Sanford today.

“When asked whether he was inciting violence, Muhammad replied defiantly saying: "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

“The bounty announcement came moments after members of the group called for the mobilization of 10,000 black men to capture George Zimmerman, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer who shot Trayvon Martin last month.

“Muhammad said members of his group would search for Zimmerman themselves in Maitland and Jacksonville -- where the 28-year old worked before the shooting, employees there told the Orlando Sentinel.”

Personally, I think it is a logical outgrowth of your previous statements such as “Well, we had better find the truth, this is not going stand as it is.” Now, don’t get me wrong… I am not saying that you’re encouraging such behavior, but I am saying that there are many who are taking your basic attitude a step too far.

Cred sez: The legal systems of most reasonable jurisdictions seem to make a distinction between property crime and those against persons.

Jack replies: Yes, they do. Perhaps that is another one those laws that you think should be looked at for changing.

Cred sez: was the last time you heard of an execution taking place for someone that is a thief? I guess we have to go back to the days of cattle rustling and such to find your equivalent, do you think?

Jack replies: When was the last time you read a news account where someone was walking around with a couple dozen felonies on their records but the courts let him out to prey on even more people? We might even have to go back a day or two to find such an amazing story. We are getting pretty far afield from the original post but you really need to know that law-abiding, innocent citizens are getting past the point of being fed up with this kind of “justice.” If the courts did their work properly would we even need a neighborhood watch?

Cred sez: Thanks again for your visit to this end of the ideological divide, many such journeys are possible, let Credence2 be your guide.

Jack replies: Well, I’ve debated similar topics with hundreds and hundreds of people from college professors and self-proclaimed rocket scientists all the way down to high school kids and very seldom find the willingness to listen as you have shown. I am always up for learning from someone who actually has something educated to say.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

Span sez: First of all let us look at the circumstance. At the time George Zimmerman was on neighborhood watch what crime, what situation was taking place as it pertained to young Trayvon Martin besides focusing on a black male minding his own business.

Jack replies: Well, you have yet to establish in any way that Zimmerman paid attention to Martin because he is BLACK. Other than your emotion and desire, there is no evidence, no proof, no anything at all to establish such as case for you. You want to make a claim of racism? Then back it up with something other than “gee, I really want it to be that way.”

Span sez: What was the main reason Zimmerman was focused on Trayvon Martin-other than being a blacks in the area and since other blacks have been spotted committing crimes

Jack replies: Zimmermans neighbor, who happens to be black, said that there are many crimes being committed in the area and most of them are being done by black teens. You didn’t know that, did you.

Span sez: it is only logical to assume the next black you see is a criminal in the eyes of Zimmerman apparently blacks need to be watched.

Jack replies: Still no evidence other than your own projections and desires.

Span: There was no circumstance, crime or any instance other than it was Zimmerman's interpretation of what he conjured up in his mind as to what a black person could be doing in this neighborhood-the idea that the black might actually have a right to be there obviously never cross Zimmerman's mind.

Jack replies: Mind-reading now in addition to posting. Multi-talented.

Span sez: Someone who thinks their life is being threatened does not track down the one who is threatening them.

Jack replies: Since that is not what happened, and since no one has claimed that is what happened, your building a non-exsistant claim out of thin air – totally from your imagination.

Span sez: If you're the one with lethal force how can someone unarmed threatened you?

Jack replies: After being so imaginative in previous statements now you want to suffer from a lack of imagination? Could the gun have been holstered when Zimmerman confronted Martin – why, yes, it could have been. At which point there was NO “lethal force”. Could Martin have gotten the drop on Zimmerman even with Zimmerman pointing a gun at him – why, yes, it happens every day, and Martin was a young teen football player going aginst a middle aged fat guy. Did Martin even know there was a gun on Zimmerman – you don’t know that, do you. But you comment anyway.

Span sez: There is no way this Zimmerman was threatened.

Jack replies: That’s odd… I have not seen your name on any of the stories about what the eyewitness said. You’d better get down to Florida and talk with the cops about what you saw.

Span sez: What distorted idea of Zimmerman had about black people he executed on the day he took the innocent life of someone who did nothing and had no reason to be approached by Zimmerman or anyone else

Jack replies: PROVE that Zimmerman has a “distorted” idea of black people. Because right now, the only one I am seeing who is promoting distorted, non-factual ideas is you.

SpanStar 5 years ago

Thank you Creedence2 for your words of acknowledgment. People must stand vigilant in the face of injustice because too many years have passed where ignorance have prevailed in spite of the truth.

I encourage you to continue and others like you to "Stand Your Ground!"

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

SpanSpar, thank you so much for adding your voice to discussion.

When I speak of civility as opposed to socialism, I recognize that we all have biases, stereotypes and pigeonholing that is part of being human. But civility means that I don't go into the public square in my underwear. That we conduct ourselves and treat people as we want to be treated.

Yes, I agree with you, Martin was doing absolutely nothing to warrant the confrontation with Zimmerman outside of wearing a hoodie and being black, what else was there? As you say, the kid was minding his own business, where is the reasonable suspicion or probable cause that promted Zimmerman to act? Is it against the law to return from the store on a public throughfare with a can of iced tea and some candy?

Professionalism would have required that we keep our biases to ourselves, obviously, professional is the least appropriate term when describing Zimmerman at least at the stage he accosted the boy.

I don't buy all that stuff about fear from Zimmerman, he knew that he had a firearm and was not in any danger from an unarmed teenager.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

JAck replies: Trust me, the gun-enthusiast community across the country is also very upset over the shooting and would like it resolved quickly. It tars all of us. But as a person who closely follows many shootings around the country I can tell you that "justice" is often not found, on either side, in many cases. Maliciousness, stupidity, ignorance of the law, and just plain mopery works on both the prosecution and defense side far too often. Some guilty walk... and many innocents are put in jail.

Ok,Jack, but it should also be noted that those of us on the progressive left are watching too, with great interest as to how and when proper determinations are made and justice is to be dispensed. If it were not for the 'agitators' this case could have easily been buried, as the authorities were not particularly interested until people started making a ruckus.

Jack replies: Speaking of weapons, Jackson and Sharpton are both two-edged swords for the black community. If it wasn't for the harm they do the country overall I would personally love to see them out there "agitating."

That is a matter of opinion.

jack replies: Why, yes, you did. YOU stated in the original hub, "The issue here is the principle of the law and how it applies in practice. This incident has made it clear that it needs to be abolished or substantially rewritten."

Ok Jack, I stand corrected, I do not want vigilantism from either side, lets give the law the opportunity to work. I want an impartial investigation done promptly with advocates on each side making sure that the main players are honest throughout the process. But if there is wrong doing, I want Zimmerman arrested as a violator of the law and/or the law reviewed and reevaluated as to whether there is a shortcoming allowing for future Zimmermans to commit homicide with impunity.

Author

Credence2 5 years agofrom Florida (Space Coast)

Jack, this is in reply to the Texas case post you made earlier…

Jack replies: Or socialist, as the view changes. :-)

I guess I have to consider “socialist” synonymous with civility. Why do rightwing folks always scream ‘socialist’ regardless how inappropriate the word is in this circumstance?

Jack replies: Actually, many states do allow lethal force in defense of property. Texas in odd in that lethal force of defense of property is legal after dark, but not during the daylight. It appears that Hawaii is rather weak on the subject.

This is true, but it is great that gun slinging is not in vogue in Hawaii, we may have a more evolved manner of settling our difference.

jack replies: Again, in some states that is acceptable and legal. But Mr. Horn says he defended himself because he was in fear of his life, not because someone was stealing china. Two different worlds.

I don’t think so, Mr. Horn was out of line. He should not have been at the scene in the first place. I am resolved to the fact that we are going to disagree here.

Jack replies: 1) The police are not required to provide any level of assistance to an individual. That is the ruling of multiple Supreme Court cases. 2) This is Texas. It's possible to wait 30 to 60 minutes for the police to get within five miles of your home. What guarantee do you give that the thieves will hang around for the police to show up to "apprehend" someone.

You were the one saying ‘be patient and let the wheels of justice turn’. Report it and let the police deal with it. For fear of letting the perp get away, the old man felt he had to act quickly. Maybe that is the attitude of the crowd that insist on prompt action in the Martin case. I can’t abide vigilantism from either side of the ideological divide.

Jack replies: "things" represent labor that people gave of their lives to earn. Some people consider stealing "things" as no different than forcing someone into invountary servitude for the same period of time it takes to earn those "things."

The legal systems of most reasonable jurisdictions seem to make a distinction between property crime and those against persons. The sentences/penalties are commensurate to the crimes in either case. When was the last time you heard of an execution taking place for someone that is a thief? I guess we have to go back to the days of cattle rustling and such to find your equivalent, do you think?

Thanks again for your visit to this end of the ideological divide, many such journeys are possible, let Credence2 be your guide.

SpanStar 5 years ago

Jack Burton,

First of all let us look at the circumstance. At the time George Zimmerman was on neighborhood watch what crime, what situation was taking place as it pertained to young Trayvon Martin besides focusing on a black male minding his own business. What was the main reason Zimmerman was focused on Trayvon Martin-other than being a blacks in the area and since other blacks have been spotted committing crimes it is only logical to assume the next black you see is a criminal in the eyes of Zimmerman apparently blacks need to be watched.

There was no circumstance, crime or any instance other than it was Zimmerman's interpretation of what he conjured up in his mind as to what a black person could be doing in this neighborhood-the idea that the black might actually have a right to be there obviously never cross Zimmerman's mind.

Someone who thinks their life is being threatened does not track down the one who is threatening them. If you're the one with lethal force how can someone unarmed threatened you? There is no way this Zimmerman was threatened. What distorted idea of Zimmerman had about black people he executed on the day he took the innocent life of someone who did nothing and had no reason to be approached by Zimmerman or anyone else

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

span seZ: I read that before where some people are saying you Zimmerman is part Hispanic so that means you can't go against a minority race-Ridiculous, what do people think "Uncle Tom" is.

Jack replies: Well, I have not heard anyone say that because zimmerman is part hispanic that he cannot be a racist. What I have heard, and what I have said, is that a person with many black family members is generally not a person who you point a finger at for being racist.

And if you want to compare someone to an uncle tom I would suggest you have an abundance of evidence to do so. What evidence do you have that zimmerman is a racist. Nothing, eh. Nada. Zip. Squat.

Span sez: On the news as a neighbor and friend of Zimmerman, the neighbor pointed out that this Zimmerman was fed up with the conditions in his community as it pertained to crime.

Jack replies: Does being "fed up with crime" make one a racist? Hmmmm....no.

Span sez: The fact that the neighbor said Zimmerman was Fed Up is an indication he wasn't thinking clearly and people who Are fed up usually aren't focused on doing the right thing but they are focused on doing something!

Jack replies: Does not thinking clearly or being focused make on a racist? Hmmmm.... no either.

Jack Burton 5 years agofrom The Midwest

cred sez: Ok, lets get it resolved, because it smells bad. With this new info, your point may be well taken as to the possibility that Zimmerman is innocent, I will give you that, but I doubt it.

Jack replies: If the young man was on top of zimmerman beating on his because of fear for HIS own life based on zimmermans actions or words then I would not consider zimmerman innocent. And I would not allow him to use a self defense option. But again, we just don't know.

Cred sez: I don’t want this case swept under the rug but kept front and center until justice is done.

JAck replies: Trust me, the gun-enthusiast community across the country is also very upset over the shooting and would like it resolved quickly. It tars all of us. But as a person who closely follows many shootings around the country I can tell you that "justice" is often not found, on either side, in many cases. Maliciousness, stupidity, ignorance of the law, and just plain mopery works on both the prosecution and defense side far too often. Some guilty walk... and many innocents are put in jail.

cred sez: and the right must be intimidated by that alone

Jack replies: Speaking of weapons, Jackson and Sharpton are both two-edged swords for the black community. If it wasn't for the harm they do the country overall I would personally love to see them out there "agitating."

Cred sez: No, I knew what the law covered without having to delve into the minutia.

Jack replies: Hope if you ever get into trouble you have a lawyer who fully understands the law's "minutia." THAT is where most of the guilt or innocence is determined.

cred sez: Did I imply any thing else?

jack replies: Why, yes, you did. YOU stated in the original hub, "The issue here is the principle of the law and how it applies in practice. This incident has made it clear that it needs to be abolished or substantially rewritten."

Your words, cred. You want to change the law before any determination of guilt or innocence, or before seeing if the law even applies to this case.

cred sez: I am a progressive, it is the right that is for summary justice

Jack replies: Then why are you calling for "summary justice" on a law that you don't like without waiting to see how the justice system handles it?

SpanStar 5 years ago

I read that before where some people are saying you Zimmerman is part Hispanic so that means you can't go against a minority race-Ridiculous, what do people think "Uncle Tom" is.

On the news as a neighbor and friend of Zimmerman, the neighbor pointed out that this Zimmerman was fed up with the conditions in his community as it pertained to crime. The fact that the neighbor said Zimmerman was Fed Up is an indication he wasn't thinking clearly and people who Are fed up usually aren't focused on doing the right thing but they are focused on doing something!

How many of us want somebody working on a project of our who is fed up? Why? Because we know the likelihood of them making the project worse is evident.